{"id":17218,"date":"2026-05-09T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-05-09T07:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/?p=17218"},"modified":"2026-05-06T14:36:30","modified_gmt":"2026-05-06T12:36:30","slug":"generation-ai-who-is-raising-these-children","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/generation-ai-who-is-raising-these-children\/","title":{"rendered":"Generation AI Is Growing Up. Who Is Really Raising These Children?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Generation AI grows up with machines<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

For these children, artificial intelligence is not a futuristic curiosity. It is becoming something increasingly obvious, like electricity or the telephone. Children born after 2022 are the ones who make up Generation AI<\/strong>. Gregory Stock describes them as the first people to grow up \u201cin a world of immersive artificial intelligence, intelligent robots, and blurry boundaries between the innate and the made.\u201d Their future will not merely continue our world. It will lead into an entirely new shape of human nature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Generation AI and the Transformation of Human Being<\/em>, Stock proposes a reversal of the usual perspective. Instead of asking what artificial intelligence and other advanced technologies may become, we should ask who we ourselves will become. This shift in emphasis is fundamental. Technology itself does not stand at the centre. What is at stake is the transformation of human nature<\/strong>: the way we learn, build bonds, develop identity and understand our own uniqueness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is AI raising children? This is not just \u201chelp\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Generation AI will not be a \u201cuser\u201d of technology.<\/strong> It will grow up inside it. A child from this generation may ask a chatbot about homework, ask an image generator for an illustration for a story, or ask an intelligent assistant to explain an emotion \u2014 all before turning to a parent or teacher.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is where the most important educational question appears: who is really raising children born at the turn of the second and third decades of the 21st century<\/strong> \u2014 adults or algorithms? The answer is no longer as obvious as we would like to believe. A study by The Alan Turing Institute<\/a> showed that 22 percent of children aged 8 to 12 already say they use generative AI tools, and 72 percent of that group use them at least once a month. The most common uses include finding information, creating images for fun, entertainment and help with homework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is not yet full symbiosis, but its beginnings are clearly visible. For Generation AI, which from infancy may have access to a perfectly responsive agent, the boundary between \u201chelp\u201d and \u201cupbringing\u201d blurs<\/strong> with extraordinary speed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Artificial intelligence<\/a> also increasingly helps parents<\/strong>. In many small parenting decisions, we already rely on AI \u201cquietly.\u201d We ask an algorithm to choose a bedtime story, to explain a biology concept more simply, to prepare a study plan, or to suggest a creative game. Some parents and teachers do this intentionally. Others do it reflexively, because an intelligent system can be faster, more patient and more available than a tired adult.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Will the new generation be wiser?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Stock asks, however, not only what artificial intelligence does for the child. He also asks what the child may stop doing because of it. A child\u2019s brain develops through effort: solving problems, coping with frustration, building attention. When AI instantly provides a ready-made explanation, organises the world and translates it into easier terms, the human mind loses part of its training<\/strong>. And that training used to be necessary for developing patience, independent thought and cognitive resilience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The data suggest that this fear is not abstract. In The Alan Turing Institute study, 76 percent of parents and almost the same share of teachers feared that children may trust technology too much and fail to think critically about the information it provides. At the same time, teachers reported that where pupils use AI for schoolwork, more than half also use it to submit generated content as their own. The problem, then, is not the tool itself, but the risk that the boundary between help and cognitive substitution will shift.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This leads to an even more difficult question: will Generation AI be wiser, or merely more efficiently served by intelligent tools?<\/strong> Research does not yet offer a final answer, but it does reveal ambivalence. On the one hand, AI can support creativity, personalise learning and help children with additional educational needs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the other hand, teachers notice a decline in some pupils\u2019 engagement with their own work and a narrowing of the variety of ideas they submit. In other words, Generation AI may become wiser in the sense of having access to knowledge, while at the same time becoming less trained in independent thinking, creativity and coping with uncertainty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A new kind of attachment, or dependence?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The question of bonds<\/a> is even more intriguing. If artificial intelligence becomes a permanent element of a child\u2019s everyday life, it can easily turn into a source of psychological dependence. As a result, it may weaken the chance to develop real resilience. A child who, from the earliest years, interacts with an agent that is always available, polite, responsive and perfectly adapted to their needs may begin to treat this model of relationship as the norm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But people do not work that way. A parent gets tired. A teacher has no time. A friend misunderstands an intention. A conversation sometimes hurts more than it soothes. It is precisely these frictions that teach patience, empathy, negotiation and psychological resilience. If a system that constantly smooths reality over takes over a significant part of cognitive and emotional contact, children may become less able to bear the imperfection of real relationships.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n