AI IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND THE HYPOTHESIS OF A NEW HUMAN

As we know, artificial intelligence is entering all government departments, including scientific research. In the United States, the government has chosen to significantly increase the percentage of AI employed in research processes, especially in the medical and pharmaceutical fields. The reason is practical and well-documented: conventional laboratories are extremely expensive and take a very long time. Developing a drug requires years of experimentation, analysis, errors, adjustments, and clinical trials. Each phase weighs on public and private budgets.

Artificial intelligence, however, works on a completely different scale. It possesses the computing, memory, and predictive analysis capabilities that allow simulations in just a few weeks of what previously required extensive experimental cycles. It can generate new molecules, predict their stability and toxicity, analyze genetic variants, and model complex cellular behaviors. It is a technical aid, not a substitute for the human mind: it allows scientists to build on a more solid foundation and focus their energies on testing and final decisions.

In this context, another piece of news has emerged that has attracted considerable attention. Research published in PNAS , the journal of the National Academy of Sciences, suggests that this integration between humans and AI could alter not only research structures, but also some human cognitive functions. The authors draw a striking comparison: evolution could experience a similar acceleration to that which occurred billions of years ago when primitive cells incorporated mitochondria, transforming into complex organisms.

According to the study, constantly delegating memory, data analysis, and information evaluation to machines could weaken these same abilities in humans. This isn’t due to a negative effect of AI, but rather to simple adaptation: when a function isn’t exercised, it tends to decline. This phenomenon is already observable on a small scale, for example, in the increasing difficulty with orientation among generations hyper-accustomed to digital navigation. The study hypothesizes that the same mechanism could extend to deeper skills.

This doesn’t mean “the disappearance of the mind” or other extreme scenarios. It means, more realistically, that Homo sapiens is undergoing a phase of cognitive recalibration. On the one hand, they are gaining speed, precision, and power thanks to machines; on the other, they risk losing training in functions that have defined our evolutionary history.

The issue is cultural, not apocalyptic. Artificial intelligence is accelerating science and technology, but the active presence of scientists, researchers, doctors, journalists, and anyone who must interpret data and make decisions remains essential. Delegation works as long as it doesn’t replace thought.

The future is unwritten. It depends on how we use this new tool and how well we keep alive the most human part of who we are.

–