Artificial intelligence can generate persuasive arguments in seconds, but can it tell us whether those arguments are true?
In 1947, as Europe emerged from the devastation of the Second World War, British writer Dorothy Sayers delivered a lecture at Oxford that asked a troubling question: What if modern education had forgotten how to teach students how to think? That question feels even more urgent in 2026, when technology can imitate human reasoning without possessing any commitment to reality.
The lost tools
In her essay “The Lost Tools of Learning,” Sayers argued that schools were teaching subjects but neglecting the intellectual disciplines that empower learners to evaluate ideas. Without these disciplines, she warned, people become susceptible to mass propaganda and emotional manipulation in proportions previously unknown.
To avoid this peril, earlier generations of Western education relied on a framework known as the Trivium: grammar, logic and rhetoric.
Grammar meant gathering facts and understanding the structure of language. Logic provided the “mental mill” to test those facts and identify contradictions and fallacies. Rhetoric taught the responsible use of language to communicate truth persuasively.
These were not merely academic skills; they were the intellectual tools required for a free society. A nation that expects its citizens to govern themselves must cultivate minds capable of reasoning about public questions. Without those habits of thought, public debate easily slips into slogans and emotional appeals.
The moral center
C.S. Lewis voiced a similar concern in “The Abolition of Man.” He warned that modern culture often rejected the idea of objective moral truth while still expecting people to behave virtuously. His famous metaphor described the result:
“In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise,” Lewis wrote.
Lewis argued that education should form both intellect and moral character. When students are trained only in technical reasoning, moral truths are treated as subjective preferences. As a result, society produces citizens who are intellectually capable but morally disoriented.
The algorithmic age
Today, the need for this “intellectual armor” is even more urgent. In 1947, Sayers worried about the “battery of words” from the radio. In 2026, we face algorithmic echo chambers and generative AI.
As a result, truth is now frequently curated by engagement metrics. Algorithms feed us what we already believe, reinforcing bias and discouraging the discipline required to test our ideas. As AI can now produce polished arguments in seconds, the ability to distinguish persuasive language from sound reasoning becomes a survival skill.
If the armor has grown thin, our task is clear: We must teach our students not only what to think about but also how to think well.
A civic necessity
The Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn saw the political consequences of abandoning truth. In his essay “Live Not by Lies,” he warned that tyranny depends on the willingness of ordinary people to participate in falsehood. Freedom begins with the moral courage to refuse the lie.
In my work on education policy in Utah, I am frequently reminded how central this principle remains. Thomas Jefferson wrote that educating and informing the whole mass of the people is “the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.” Education, in his view, was not merely preparation for employment but also preparation for citizenship.
The restoration of intellectual discipline is not an educational preference; it is a civic necessity. A free society cannot rely indefinitely on inherited traditions of virtue. Each generation must be taught the habits of mind that allow them to recognize truth, reject falsehood and reason together about the common good.
The battle for civilization is fought in classrooms, in the formation of the mind and in the habits of thought we pass to the next generation. If the armor has grown thin, our task is clear: We must teach our students not only what to think about but also how to think well.