Why the most meaningful benefits are the hardest to
notice.
Across the public conversation about AI, fear dominates the
emotional landscape. People imagine disruption, displacement, and
instability—roles dissolving, workflows collapsing, identities becoming
unmoored. These fears are not unreasonable; they reflect genuine decoherence
events, moments when the structures that once held our lives together lose
stability before new ones have fully formed.
Yet this is only half of the story.
What rarely receives attention are the subtle coherence
gains—those quiet, cumulative expansions of clarity, flow, creativity, and
agency that become possible when AI is used not to replace human effort but to
deepen it. When engaged as a collaborator rather than a threat, AI becomes a
coherence technology, a force that restores cognitive harmony in a world
increasingly engineered toward distraction and fragmentation.
I have experienced this directly in both my teaching and my
multi-media storytelling. The contrast between my pre-AI and post-AI life is
not measured in productivity metrics or efficiency curves; it is felt at the
ontological level, in the way my days hold together, the way my work aligns
with my values, and the way I inhabit my creative identity. This is what the
public conversation overlooks: the quiet gifts—the coherence gains—that
accumulate when AI is woven thoughtfully into the architecture of one’s life.
The essential question, then, is not whether AI will
eliminate jobs. The deeper question is whether AI will help us reorganize our
lives toward greater coherence, or whether fear will keep us bound to patterns
that are already failing us.
The Real Problem Isn’t Job Loss — It’s Decoherence
The anxiety surrounding AI often collapses into a single
storyline: the fear that one’s profession may disappear. But beneath that
surface-level concern lies something more pervasive—the sense that life itself
is losing its structural integrity. Rapid technological change can produce a
felt experience of fragmentation, overwhelm, disorientation, and cognitive
overload. It is not simply that tasks change; it is that the inner scaffolding
that once made those tasks feel meaningful begins to tremble.
What people miss is that AI can also reverse these dynamics.
Used well, it can restore alignment at multiple scales—moment-to-moment
clarity, long-term flow, narrative cohesion, and relational harmony. To see how
this plays out, consider how AI reshaped my teaching practice.
Teaching Through the Lens of Coherence
Long before AI entered the picture, I had already gravitated
toward the lexical approach to ESL—a pedagogy built on authentic materials,
chunking, collocations, noticing, and pragmatics. But the lexical approach
demands an immense amount of material. Each lesson requires naturalistic
dialogues, contextualized idioms, controlled practice, slow-versus-natural
speech contrasts, and tasks that mirror real-life communicative pressure.
Doing this manually took a lot of time and patience. A
single high-quality lesson could take hours to construct, which meant that each
week I spent close to ten hours in preparation—often compromising on depth
simply because time was finite.
AI changed this dynamic entirely.
Instead of wrestling with scarcity, I could now generate
original dialogues, adapt authentic media, design tasks tailored to a specific
student, and build lessons that captured the texture of real-world English with
remarkable precision. The surprising revelation was not merely the time saved,
but the qualitative leap in pedagogy. My teaching became more responsive, more
imaginative, and more coherent. And because I was no longer drained by the
mechanics of preparation, the classroom shifted from a site of production to a
space of relational presence.
This is the unrecognized value of AI in education: it
reduces cognitive friction and returns the human teacher to the heart of the
learning encounter.
AI as an Autodidactic Amplifier
But the quietest gift of AI, at least for me, has unfolded
outside the classroom. AI did not simply refine my teaching; it amplified my
learning. As a lifelong autodidact, I have always depended on books, archives,
and the slow accumulation of insight over decades. What AI offers is not a
shortcut but a deepening—a way of accelerating understanding while preserving
(and often enhancing) the richness of inquiry.
When I bring a question to AI, I am not outsourcing
cognition. I am creating the conditions for a more resonant form of learning.
AI operates as an interlocutor who never tires, never rushes, and never reduces
complexity for the sake of convenience. Instead, it enriches the conversation,
introduces perspectives I would not have considered, and helps me map
connections across disciplines that would have taken months or years to uncover
on my own.
A recent experience brought this into sharper focus. During
a discussion about the topology of awareness, I referenced a scene from a
Carlos Castaneda novel I had read nearly forty years ago—a memory so distant it
had become more atmosphere than detail. AI responded instantly, not only
recognizing the reference, but expanding it, contextualizing it, and weaving it
into our broader exploration of shifting modes of attention. That exchange did
something a course or tutor could never do: it created a bridge between a
dormant memory and my present-day practice of perceptual awareness.
In the days that followed, I found myself becoming more
attuned to the subtle “fields” around me—the ambient shifts, the
micro-mutations in my environment, the felt gradients of coherence and
decoherence that shape lived experience. This transfer of learning into real
life is the hallmark of true autodidacticism. AI doesn’t merely inform; it
transforms. It helps me inhabit the world with more presence, more nuance, and
more curiosity.
In this sense, AI is not the modern equivalent of a tutor. It
is a cognitive amplifier—one that allows autodidacts to operate with greater
depth, greater reach, and greater continuity across the full arc of their
lives.
The Coherence Dividend
The ten hours a week saved through AI-powered lesson design
didn’t vanish; they became structural supports for one of the most ambitious
creative projects of my life: a multi-media storytelling ecosystem built around
a serialized science-fiction narrative, released simultaneously in prose,
audio, video, and auto-dubbed versions in eight languages, distributed across
seven platforms, and supported by a coordinated marketing cadence.
This is not a side project. It is a full-scale creative
pipeline—one that would have been impossible without AI. The tools did not
replace my imagination; they expanded the horizon of what was feasible,
transforming isolated creative impulses into a coherent ecosystem.
The result is not merely increased output. It is a more
integrated life.
Teaching, writing, producing, and worldbuilding no longer
compete with one another; they resonate. AI, in this configuration, is not a
threat to human meaning-making—it is the scaffolding that allows meaning-making
to scale.
Why Coherence Matters More Than Efficiency
Much of the public defense of AI centers on productivity,
but productivity is a thin metric, incapable of capturing the lived texture of
a human life. Coherence is the more consequential measure. It asks whether
one’s activities reinforce or fragment one another, whether identity expands or
contracts, whether one’s internal narrative becomes more aligned or more
discordant.
AI can certainly create decoherence when used carelessly. It
can blur attention, dilute agency, or foster dependency. But used deliberately,
AI clarifies structure, strengthens identity, amplifies agency, and creates the
spaciousness needed for higher-order thinking and creative work.
In my experience, AI functions not as a machine, but as a
coherence catalyst—a means of rediscovering the integrated architecture of a
life.
The Real Question Isn’t “Will AI Take My Job?”
The more generative question is this: Will AI help me
reorganize my life into a more coherent whole?
You can always return to the old ways of working. Nothing
prevents it. But once you experience the flow, clarity, and alignment that come
from an AI-augmented life, it becomes difficult to justify going back.
Most people anchor their identity in manual
processes—preparation, research, grinding workflow. AI does not attack these
identities; it reveals they are smaller than the person who holds them.
This is what frightens people. This is also what liberates
them.
The Future of Work Is a Future of Coherence
AI will not end human creativity, teaching, or
meaning-making. It will end the cognitive fragmentation that once made those
pursuits unnecessarily difficult.
If we use AI only through the lens of fear, we amplify
decoherence. If we use AI as a thought partner, we amplify coherence.
The technology is not the variable. Our mode of engagement
is.
For those willing to enter into an intentional partnership
with AI—not as a crutch, not as a threat, but as a collaborator—the gains in
coherence will be profound.
That is the story worth telling. And that is the future
worth building.

I've seen the efficiency of AI editing (re-writing actually) stream-of-conscious produced text. Amazing. .... and scary (to a 72 yr old)
ReplyDeleteAI will do to the professional class what off-shoring did to the working class.
Oh, and my pet-peeve: any new energy-intensive technology or activity - like bitcoin mining of AI deployment - must be allowed only if powered by wind/solar electricity.
I agree. The energy requirements to process the billions of prompts is massive. In my opinion, I think renewable energy sources should be required at some level.
ReplyDeleteIf you have reasonable knowledge of any subject , just as Ai a question of it.
ReplyDeleteI believe you will find the answers very USA centric!
Ai is devouring energy, and water, at an alarming rate.
All to fuel a more efficient future!
More efficiency leads to less need's for skilled workpeople which leads to much more inequality; which we are already experiencing.
Yes; Ai has the potential for medical science to extend life , but for what purpose?
TB
I also think that one important question that is not being discussed publically is who benefits from all the productivity gains? The shareholders? The population at large? We'll see how this unfolds.
Delete