At the Funeral of Knowledge: AI, Comfort, and the Death of Curiosity

A Eulogy for a Dying Mind

We gather in a hushed, virtual hall, heads bowed not for a person but for an ideal. In the casket lies Knowledge, a once-vibrant force now rendered frail. The atmosphere is eerily comfortable—too comfortable. There’s no public outcry or mass vigil; many haven’t even noticed the passing. In truth, we modern humans are not just mourners at this funeral—we have been participants in Knowledge’s demise, even its unwitting executioners. Our collective choices have smothered curiosity and critical thought, preferring the gentle ease of ignorance over the hard work of understanding. Society’s very psychology inclines toward comfort over truth, instinctively resisting ideas that challenge our cozy convictions¹. As we stand before the coffin, it’s time to reflect on what brought us here: the rise of uncritical AI usage, the fading of reading culture, educational decay, and the triumph of tribalism over nuance. Each has been a pallbearer carrying Knowledge to its grave.

The Rise of AI and the Atrophy of Critical Thinking

In the front pew, we see a sleek machine—Artificial Intelligence personified as a well-meaning friend who inadvertently dealt a fatal blow. Tools like ChatGPT promised to augment human knowledge, but when used without discernment they have become agents of intellectual atrophy. Many today ask AI for answers and accept them on faith, as if outsourcing their brain to the algorithm. The result is a decline in critical scrutiny: why struggle with a problem when a digital oracle serves up a quick reply? A recent study by Microsoft and Carnegie Mellon researchers warned that higher confidence in AI is correlated with less human critical thinking². They found that people who trusted AI outputs too much engaged in less fact-checking and analysis, allowing their own cognitive “muscles” to weaken³. In other words, if ChatGPT says it, it must be true – and our minds, unexercised, quietly atrophy.

This phenomenon extends beyond just getting trivial answers; it shapes how we form beliefs. When was the last time we doubted a convenient AI-generated fact or double-checked a source? Too often, the answer is rarely. The instant gratification of a slick answer discourages the patience required for investigation. We see students who feed an essay prompt into an AI and submit the output verbatim, never questioning the content. We see professionals relying on AI summaries without reading the full reports. In our trust and haste, we forget that wisdom isn’t downloadable. The old habits of verifying information and thinking through problems are fading. What dies is not just knowledge of particular facts, but the habit of earning knowledge—of engaging deeply and critically with information. Each uncritical use of AI is a spadeful of dirt on Knowledge’s coffin, a subtle betrayal of our own capacity to think. Used properly, AI can be a powerful tool, but used lazily, it lulls us into intellectual complacency, heralding a future where human judgment lies dormant and unquestioned answers reign supreme⁴⁵.

The Fading Culture of Reading

Across the aisle at this funeral stands a neglected bookshelf, gathering dust—an emblem of our fading reading culture. Once, books were treasured mentors and reading was a cherished ritual. Today, long-form reading is often treated like an archaic art. The young especially have drifted from books to screens, from pages to endless scrolling. The statistics are alarming: in 1984, 35% of 13-year-olds in the U.S. reported reading for fun “almost every day,” but by 2023 that number had plummeted to just 14%⁶. Nearly one-third of teens say they never read for pleasure at all⁶. This is more than a nostalgic lament—it signals a fundamental shift in how we engage with knowledge.

What replaces books is a blitz of bite-sized content and algorithm-curated feeds. Instead of thoughtfully absorbing a novel or a history tome, we swipe through videos, memes, and status updates. Social media and entertainment platforms have trained us to prefer 15-second dopamine hits over the quiet, sustained effort of reading. The consequences for critical thinking are profound. Reading, especially deep reading, isn’t just about absorbing information; it’s an exercise in empathy, imagination, and concentration. It teaches us to follow complex arguments, to hold attention through pages of explanation, to appreciate nuance and context. When that habit erodes, attention spans shorten and patience for complexity dwindles. Educators note that even when basic literacy is achieved, students are “not reading in the ways that they need to read in order to be prepared for the tasks of learning and critical thinking”⁶. In place of nuanced understanding, we get snapshot knowledge: a quick Wikipedia summary, a trending hashtag, a simplistic infographic.

This decline in reading for pleasure has dire implications. A generation that doesn’t read much is a generation less equipped to think independently. They may excel at tapping and swiping, but struggle with sustained analysis. And it’s not their fault alone—society’s attention economy has engineered these habits. Short-form video and clickbait headlines are ever-present temptations, gently teaching us that if learning isn’t instantly fun, it’s not worth doing. Thus we see Knowledge on its deathbed, not only from lack of information (we have plenty of that), but from lack of meaningful engagement with information. The funeral of Knowledge is filled with glowing screens, each device a pallbearer dimly reflecting the books it helped displace.

Education in Decay: When Schools Stop Teaching Thinking

A figure in academic robes stands by Knowledge’s casket, head bowed. This is the modern education system, an institution that should have been Knowledge’s staunchest defender, yet it too bears responsibility for the decline. Education today often feels like it has lost its soul. Rather than igniting curiosity or fostering independent thought, many schools prioritize standardization, conformity, and passive learning. Students advance by reciting answers on tests, not by questioning or debating ideas. Classrooms frequently reward obedience over originality—after all, conformity is easier to grade. The result is a populace schooled in passing exams, but ill-equipped in questioning the world around them.

It wasn’t always meant to be this way. Education, at its best, is a liberating force: a process of learning how to think, not what to think. But somewhere along the line, that mission faltered. Critical thinking exercises, open debates, and philosophical inquiries have been sidelined in favor of rote curricula and “teaching to the test.” In some cases, controversy is avoided entirely—teachers fear stepping outside safe guidelines, and students learn that challenging ideas can be dangerous to their grades or social standing. We end up with graduates who, having rarely been pushed to defend or refine their views, default to shallow thinking and fragile opinions. As one dismayed educator observed of her college students, many “did not seem to understand how to reason or argue” because they were never truly taught, and they grew up in an online culture that “celebrated opinion over reason”⁷. In essence, we have taught a generation how to pass, not how to probe.

The deeper indictment is that our system appears designed for a purpose other than genuine learning. It’s been noted that “our education system was not designed to educate, not really. Rather, it was designed to create a skillset for a society of workers”⁸. This sobering critique holds a grain of truth: schools emphasize the skills and knowledge that make one employable and “productive,” often at the expense of nurturing wisdom and critical thought. Intellectual curiosity, if it cannot be quantified or monetized, finds little encouragement. In such an environment, debates are seen as distractions, and uncomfortable questions as threats to order. A student who challenges the textbook or a teacher who strays from the syllabus may be subtly or directly discouraged. Over time, the message sinks in: don’t think too hard, just follow the script.

Thus, in the decay of education, Knowledge suffers a quiet suffocation. The very institutions meant to preserve and transmit it have, in some cases, become its stiflers. Without a course correction—toward teaching debate, encouraging questions, and valuing intellectual risk—the diplomas we hand out may as well be death certificates for independent thought. At this funeral, the eulogies spoken by school officials ring hollow if they fail to acknowledge how schooling’s shortcomings helped dig Knowledge’s grave.

Tribalism over Truth: The Loss of Intellectual Nuance

On the other side of the aisle, groups of mourners stand apart, eyeing each other with suspicion. They represent our ideological tribes – factions of society so entrenched in their beliefs that nuance and truth have become collateral damage. In the age of identity politics and polarized discourse, many people have traded open inquiry for the warm embrace of a tribe that agrees with them on everything. This tribalism has contributed to Knowledge’s demise by turning public discourse into trench warfare, where winning is valued over learning and conformity over curiosity.

In today’s cultural climate, ideas are often judged not on merit, but on the identity of the speaker or the allegiance they signal. Complex issues are flattened into slogans; individuals are reduced to labels of “us” versus “them.” The result is a chilling effect on honest discussion. People become afraid to voice a doubt or explore a gray area, lest they be cast out of their group. University students and professors across the spectrum report feeling silenced—terrified that questioning a prevailing narrative will get them branded heretics by their own peers⁹. In some progressive circles, for example, one risks being dismissed as a traitor or bigot merely for suggesting a nuanced view on a sensitive issue⁹. Likewise, in conservative strongholds, anyone diverging from orthodoxy might be derided as disloyal or “ideologically impure.” This echo chamber effect ensures that people hear only their own thoughts reflected back, reinforcing certainty and disdain for others. It’s as if each tribe has decided they possess all the knowledge worth having, and nothing outside their dogma counts. In such an environment, genuine Knowledge – broad, complex, and often self-contradictory – cannot survive for long.

Ideological tribalism also means that comfort is found in agreement, not truth. Engaging with contrary evidence or opposing views is uncomfortable, so it’s frequently avoided. Debates devolve into shouting matches or are avoided entirely; campuses and communities alike enforce unwritten rules about what can and cannot be said. The intellectual landscape polarizes: every issue is black or white, with us or against us. As one commentator noted, this insistence on absolute ideological alignment leaves no room for subtlety – “you’re either entirely supportive... or you’re viewed as entirely opposed,” and any hint of nuance becomes suspect¹⁰. Such a climate doesn’t just kill debate; it strangles the very idea of objective truth, because facts themselves get painted in partisan colors. People choose their “truth” based on tribe, discarding any knowledge that doesn’t fit their narrative.

At Knowledge’s funeral, tribalism delivers one of the cruelest eulogies. It declares that we have become too proud or too fearful to learn from one another. It admits that we often prefer the company of our convictions to the challenge of new information. In doing so, it highlights our complicity: Knowledge didn’t only die because it was attacked by external forces—it withered because we, its supposed stewards, stopped seeking it earnestly whenever it meant venturing beyond our comfort zones or group identities. The loss of intellectual nuance in public life is a dagger to the heart of Knowledge, making the world not only less informed, but less wise and less humane.

Conclusion: Resurrecting Knowledge and Curiosity

The funeral may be a somber affair, but it need not be the end of Knowledge’s story. There is a stirring, a faint hope, that this death can be followed by a resurrection—if we are willing to learn from our mistakes. Modern humans, having been both victims and participants in this decline, also hold the power to revive what has been lost. The path to revival lies in choices both personal and collective, guided by a renewed commitment to truth and learning. We can begin to exhume Knowledge from its premature grave through deliberate effort and cultural change:

• Reclaim Critical Thinking: Treat AI as a tool, not an infallible oracle. Enjoy its convenience, but always verify important answers against credible sources. Make critical thinking a daily exercise—question claims, cross-check facts, and resist the impulse to accept easy answers at face value. By using our minds actively, we keep them sharp and alive.
• Rekindle the Reading Habit: Carve out time for deep reading in a distraction-free space. Encourage young people to explore books, not as homework, but as adventures for the mind. Parents, teachers, and communities can start book clubs or reading challenges. Even 20 minutes a day of focused reading can gradually rebuild attention span and awaken curiosity that no 30-second video can deliver.
• Reform and Revive Education: Push for an education system that values debate, inquiry, and creativity over rote memorization. Teachers can incorporate Socratic discussions and open-ended projects that let students think for themselves. Educational leaders and policymakers should create space for intellectual risk-taking—where questioning the textbook isn’t insubordination but a step toward deeper understanding. When students learn how to think instead of what to think, Knowledge will no longer be suffocated in classrooms.
• Foster Intellectual Humility: We must recognize that no tribe or ideology has a monopoly on truth. Embrace the idea that it’s healthy to say “I might be wrong” or “I want to hear the other side.” Encourage discussions across ideological lines without demonizing participants. If you’re on social media, try following a thoughtful voice you disagree with, not to argue but to understand. Breaking out of our echo chambers can be uncomfortable, but it is in productive discomfort that Knowledge thrives.
• Celebrate Effort over Comfort: Culturally, we need to start honoring the effort that goes into understanding something complex. Rather than mocking someone for using “big words” or spending weekends on research, we should admire intellectual dedication. Make learning cool again—share not just what you know, but how you struggled to learn it. By valuing the process of gaining knowledge, we shift the incentive from easy comfort to rewarding effort.

In essence, reviving Knowledge requires a collective awakening. It means each of us choosing to be more than passive consumers of information—becoming active seekers, critical evaluators, passionate readers, and empathetic debaters. None of this is easy. Indeed, it asks us to forgo some comforts: the ease of letting AI “think” for us, the mindless bliss of infinite scrolling, the safety of never questioning our beliefs. But the reward is profound: a society that is not just well-informed, but truly enlightened and alive with understanding.

As we conclude this metaphorical funeral, let us refuse to bury Knowledge for good. Instead, let’s take it upon ourselves to be the resurrectionists of critical thought and wisdom in our time. We can turn this funeral into a lesson—one that spurs us to action so that years from now, people will look back and say that Knowledge’s death was only temporary. The spark of curiosity, once thought extinguished, can be rekindled into a bright flame. The choice is ours: remain mere spectators at the death of knowledge, or become participants in its revival. In the end, the greatest honor we can show Knowledge is not in mourning it, but in bringing it back to life.

References

Footnotes

1. Opentools. Why Intelligent People Scare Society | Schopenhauer ↩

2. Discover Magazine. Artificial Intelligence Tools Like ChatGPT May Weaken Our Problem-Solving Skills ↩

3. Discover Magazine. Artificial Intelligence Tools Like ChatGPT May Weaken Our Problem-Solving Skills ↩

4. Entrepreneur. Using AI Like ChatGPT Damages Critical Thinking: Study ↩

5. Entrepreneur. Using AI Like ChatGPT Damages Critical Thinking: Study ↩

6. Vox. Are kids really going through a literacy crisis? | Vox ↩ ↩² ↩³

7. Medium. Our Education System was not Designed for Thinking | by Ashely L. Crouch | Zenite | Medium ↩

8. Medium. Our Education System was not Designed for Thinking | by Ashely L. Crouch | Zenite | Medium ↩

9. Medium. The Death of Intellectual Curiosity on the Left | by Nuance Matters | Mar, 2025 | Medium ↩ ↩²

10. Medium. The Death of Intellectual Curiosity on the Left | by Nuance Matters | Mar, 2025 | Medium ↩