I think that there’s a head nodding truth that, for most of human history, thinking followed a familiar arc. We began in confusion. Something didn’t quite make sense. That unease or curiosity pushed us to explore by asking questions, testing hypotheses and discarding what failed. Gradually, an early, tentative structure emerged. Only then did confidence arrive, and even then, it was often far from certainty. That sequence was important and defined a process that has sustained human learning and growth. And importantly, this confidence wasn’t a feeling that appeared out of nowhere, but was earned through exposure to uncertainty and the willingness to carry it forward to a conclusion.

The Quiet Reversal

Increasingly, that order is changing. With the growing acceptance and utility of artificial intelligence, many of us now encounter ideas in reverse. Let’s follow the order and this will become strikingly clear. With AI and large language, structure arrives immediately and then a logical explanation follows immediately behind. Confidence follows quickly—not because we worked our way there, but because the presentation "feels" complete. Understanding, if it comes at all, is something we may attempt later, as a kind of cognitive backfill.

Traditional human thinking tends to move like this: confusion leads to exploration, exploration gives rise to provisional structure, and confidence emerges last. AI-mediated thinking often moves in the opposite direction. Structure comes first and confidence follows. And perhaps most curiously, understanding becomes optional. This, simply stated, can be the reordering of cognition itself.

What Happens When Structure Arrives Too Early

So, when structure arrives first, it carries a sense of authority. The answer appears already assembled, already confident. Doubt feels unnecessary and exploration feels redundant. It’s becoming a cognitive TV dinner—complete, but maybe not the healthiest of choices. The work that once shaped understanding is compressed, or bypassed entirely.

In this AI construct, confusion can feel like a flaw in reasoning, however it still serves a crucial function for us. It signals that our mental models are incomplete. It slows us down and creates a type of cognitive friction that forces engagement. When confusion is removed at the outset, exploration has nowhere to begin. The mind shifts from discovery to evaluation. Instead of asking what’s going on, we ask whether this seems right. That’s thinking upside down.

When Doubt Becomes Inefficiency

Over time, doubt itself is transformed and begins to feel inefficient rather than informative. And in this context, hesitation starts to feel more like weakness. Understanding, in this environment, becomes dangerously vestigial to its prior role as a cognitive anchor. We may still seek it, but more as reassurance than as foundation. The dangerous inversion is that we read explanations after accepting conclusions. The hard work of sense-making happens, if at all, downstream of belief.

Confidence Without Consequence

At the core of this argument is that human confidence has always carried risk. When you arrived at a conclusion through your own effort, you were exposed to its consequences. If it failed, you felt that failure and that cost sharpened judgment. But, and here’s the key point, AI absorbs errors silently. A confident answer that turns out to be wrong rarely carries the same psychological weight. And that "AI confidence" never fully belonged to us in the first place. Confidence without consequence feels real, but it doesn’t teach discernment. It doesn’t leave a "cognitive imprint" that improves future judgment.

The Flattening of Voice

One of the casualties of this inversion is the human voice itself. When structure arrives pre-formed, there is less room for the still disconnected puzzle pieces of thought. AI’s articulation becomes smooth and almost theatrical in its techno-perfection. But the curiosities that signal human thinking, like hesitation and struggle, begin to fade. And over time, people may begin to distrust their own slower, sloppier thinking, mistaking it for inadequacy. Fewer rough edges or moments of real engagement flatten our voice into something that is smooth yet counterfeit.

Reclaiming Thought

Okay, AI is powerful, and in many contexts it’s extraordinarily useful. But to me, the risk actually lies with ourselves. When we allow structure to replace struggle, we change what thinking is for. It becomes less about forming judgment and more about managing coherence. The result is that our mind shifts from builder to curator.

I think the most important part of thinking is the formative middle—the cauldron between confusion and clarity. If AI encourages us to skip that space, the fix isn’t avoidance, it’s awareness. We can choose to linger where answers arrive too quickly. We can even reintroduce friction deliberately. We can choose to think. Because thinking isn’t defined by the quality of the conclusion alone. It’s shaped by the path we take to get there. And thinking upside down, it’s working for me.