When we use AI only as an answer machine, we miss its most useful quality. We get a quick result, but we also remove the friction of thinking. Some kinds of friction are valuable.
A better approach is to treat the tool like a curious editor who is always willing to disagree. Instead of asking for an answer, I ask it to find my assumption, expose the weak point, or read the idea through a different frame.
The critical part is not giving the tool the final word. Every suggestion is a draft and every claim is a possibility that needs to be checked. Responsibility still belongs to the person asking the question and making the decision.
Used well, AI does not replace thought. It makes thought visible. It places our gaps, repetitions, and rushed decisions in front of us. Its value lies less in the answer than in the mirror it creates.