Thanks for writing this. I admire the courage it takes to put a viewpoint out there. Knowing your writing over the years, I suspect you’re not necessarily trying to be “right” here as much as trying to provoke thinking. That’s valuable.
That said, our assumptions don’t always lead us where we expect.
It’s possible the future will look like human expertise + AI leverage. But I’m not convinced. Economic incentives tend to dominate these outcomes.
If part of this is hope, that’s understandable. But history often points in a different direction.
A deliberately extreme analogy: when cars replaced horses, we lost a lot of the everyday expertise around horse riding and horse care. At the time people worried about that loss. In the end, efficiency won.
Something similar may happen here.
The future may end up being less about deep human expertise and more about human taste, judgment, and oversight — with AI doing most of the execution.
It’s not hard to imagine a world where many people no longer need to:
• code
• drive
• perform certain surgeries
Just like we no longer need to hunt for food, run long distances for survival, or live as nomads.
History suggests efficiency usually wins over preserving expertise.
Also, this framing may miss another role AI can play — helping humans build expertise and understand foundational concepts much faster than before.
The scarce human skill may end up being judgment rather than execution.
Disclosure: I wrote these points and had ChatGPT polish it.
Thank you for the reframe and helping parents realize what they CAN control to help their children naviagate the career landscape as it will continue to change at an extremely fast pace.
I'm curious what you think of the notion that there will become more and more companies with a single owner and no employees (this already exists), and perhaps the best new set of skills that can be taught in schools are how to make money off the stock markets? This is a critical income stream for the wealthy and yet skills that are not taught to the general population. During this transition, I have zero faith our government will do the right thing to help the citizens in our country stay afloat.
I wanted to add that, in the 20th century we had a pandemic, and then an industrial revolution, and I believe this AI wave will be the 21st century industrial revolution. Sadly we also had a war in the 20th century and I fear for the present and the future.
Thank you for this brilliant three-part series. Your Archimedes analogy—that AI is the magnificent lever, but we are neglecting the human fulcrum —is one of the most lucid frameworks I’ve read on this topic.
As I was reading your advice to parents to "protect the struggle", I was struck by how perfectly your thesis maps onto the ancient Indian educational model: the Gurukula system. While the technology we face today is unprecedented, the cognitive and emotional architecture of human learning you described is ancient.
Your recommendations for AI-proofing our minds beautifully mirror the core tenets of the Gurukula:
• Friction as the Mechanism of Learning: You noted that we have fallen into an "efficiency trap" , but that "the friction is the learning". In a traditional Gurukula, knowledge was never simply handed over; it had to be earned through sustained effort, memorization, and deep contemplation. The cognitive endurance you warned is disappearing was the very foundation of this ancient system.
• Physicality and Real-World Responsibility: You advised students to "build something physical" because "reality does not negotiate" . In a Gurukula, students were responsible for the daily maintenance of the ashram—gathering firewood, farming, and cleaning. This wasn't just free labor; it was a pedagogical tool designed to build the exact judgment, humility, and real-world accountability you advocate for.
• The Wisdom Traditions: You rightly pointed out that traditions like Sikh philosophy and Zen training understand that "the struggle itself is the curriculum" . The Guru-Shishya (teacher-student) lineage operates on this exact frequency, emphasizing the holistic transformation of the student's character over the mere acquisition of polished outputs.
Interestingly, this is not just history. There is a growing movement in India today to revive "hybrid" Gurukulas—schools that teach modern STEM, coding, and robotics, but wrap them entirely in the intense discipline, physical labour, and ethical reasoning of the ancient system. They operate on the exact premise of your article: before a student can safely wield the lever of technology, they must first build a place to stand.
Thank you for articulating this so clearly. It is a powerful reminder that while we must look forward to adapt to AI, the blueprint for building resilient, capable human minds has been with us for millennia.
AI-proofing is simpler than people think. Step 1: use AI for 15 minutes today. Step 2: do it again tomorrow. Step 3: repeat for 30 days. That's it. You don't need a course, a certification, or a strategy retreat. You need to draft one email with ChatGPT and see that it's better and faster. The habit forms naturally from there.
“Disrupting the learning process that builds expertise” is the real strategic risk here.
In the rush to optimise costs with AI, companies are quietly dismantling their entry-level pipelines. It looks efficient in the short term — but five years from now, it creates a structural expertise gap.
And that gap will matter.
Because effective use of AI isn’t about access — it’s about judgement:
– asking the right questions
– knowing when the answers are wrong, incomplete, or misleading
That judgement is built, not downloaded.
Remove the layer where it develops, and you don’t get leverage — you get dependency.
What’s surprising is how few CEOs are being asked the obvious question: if entry-level roles disappear, where does the next generation of expertise actually come from?
That’s not efficiency. It’s deferred risk — and it will show up exactly when firms need real expertise the most.
I have been following your writing on Li and your course as well with Kellogg on AI. I do feel there is leverage for senior professionals atleast for now to combine their expertise and judgement with AI for better lever and faster execution, but wondering that’s only because we haven’t seen AI disrupting this as yet as it’s disrupting the middle and entry level order as you also pointed out in your article. Do you see that holding or it’s only a matter of time ?
Great insights as always, Professor Sawhney. This is such a critical message for the modern professional. Understanding how to stay relevant and more importantly, how to avoid the 'zombie' trap of obsolete skills is a lesson everyone needs to address right now
Loved the analogy and emphasis on real-life experience that needs to exist in order to leverage and amplify the output. I am a parent of two high school kids and go through the anxiety of what you are describing.
Mohan, great perspective on this. Keep pushing this as the education system needs to realize that what we need to learn and how we need to learn have to be reimagined and reinvented.
Thanks for writing this. I admire the courage it takes to put a viewpoint out there. Knowing your writing over the years, I suspect you’re not necessarily trying to be “right” here as much as trying to provoke thinking. That’s valuable.
That said, our assumptions don’t always lead us where we expect.
It’s possible the future will look like human expertise + AI leverage. But I’m not convinced. Economic incentives tend to dominate these outcomes.
If part of this is hope, that’s understandable. But history often points in a different direction.
A deliberately extreme analogy: when cars replaced horses, we lost a lot of the everyday expertise around horse riding and horse care. At the time people worried about that loss. In the end, efficiency won.
Something similar may happen here.
The future may end up being less about deep human expertise and more about human taste, judgment, and oversight — with AI doing most of the execution.
It’s not hard to imagine a world where many people no longer need to:
• code
• drive
• perform certain surgeries
Just like we no longer need to hunt for food, run long distances for survival, or live as nomads.
History suggests efficiency usually wins over preserving expertise.
Also, this framing may miss another role AI can play — helping humans build expertise and understand foundational concepts much faster than before.
The scarce human skill may end up being judgment rather than execution.
Disclosure: I wrote these points and had ChatGPT polish it.
I appreciate the thoughtful comments. Indeed, predictions are hard. Especially about the future!
Loved the analogy of horse riding expertise to car driving. Guess the expertise changed to car driving or car making or car servicing.
As Prof. Mohan mention " different jobs emerge and guess they require different skills"
Love the article and the comments!
Thank you for the reframe and helping parents realize what they CAN control to help their children naviagate the career landscape as it will continue to change at an extremely fast pace.
I'm curious what you think of the notion that there will become more and more companies with a single owner and no employees (this already exists), and perhaps the best new set of skills that can be taught in schools are how to make money off the stock markets? This is a critical income stream for the wealthy and yet skills that are not taught to the general population. During this transition, I have zero faith our government will do the right thing to help the citizens in our country stay afloat.
Thank you!
Lovely read,
I wanted to add that, in the 20th century we had a pandemic, and then an industrial revolution, and I believe this AI wave will be the 21st century industrial revolution. Sadly we also had a war in the 20th century and I fear for the present and the future.
Great post. So glad to have discovered your substack. Such thought provoking wisdom.
I have written a post about my reply to Sawhney, pl check https://tametsivulnus992314.substack.com/p/back-to-the-future-why-surviving?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
Dear Professor Sawhney,
Thank you for this brilliant three-part series. Your Archimedes analogy—that AI is the magnificent lever, but we are neglecting the human fulcrum —is one of the most lucid frameworks I’ve read on this topic.
As I was reading your advice to parents to "protect the struggle", I was struck by how perfectly your thesis maps onto the ancient Indian educational model: the Gurukula system. While the technology we face today is unprecedented, the cognitive and emotional architecture of human learning you described is ancient.
Your recommendations for AI-proofing our minds beautifully mirror the core tenets of the Gurukula:
• Friction as the Mechanism of Learning: You noted that we have fallen into an "efficiency trap" , but that "the friction is the learning". In a traditional Gurukula, knowledge was never simply handed over; it had to be earned through sustained effort, memorization, and deep contemplation. The cognitive endurance you warned is disappearing was the very foundation of this ancient system.
• Physicality and Real-World Responsibility: You advised students to "build something physical" because "reality does not negotiate" . In a Gurukula, students were responsible for the daily maintenance of the ashram—gathering firewood, farming, and cleaning. This wasn't just free labor; it was a pedagogical tool designed to build the exact judgment, humility, and real-world accountability you advocate for.
• The Wisdom Traditions: You rightly pointed out that traditions like Sikh philosophy and Zen training understand that "the struggle itself is the curriculum" . The Guru-Shishya (teacher-student) lineage operates on this exact frequency, emphasizing the holistic transformation of the student's character over the mere acquisition of polished outputs.
Interestingly, this is not just history. There is a growing movement in India today to revive "hybrid" Gurukulas—schools that teach modern STEM, coding, and robotics, but wrap them entirely in the intense discipline, physical labour, and ethical reasoning of the ancient system. They operate on the exact premise of your article: before a student can safely wield the lever of technology, they must first build a place to stand.
Thank you for articulating this so clearly. It is a powerful reminder that while we must look forward to adapt to AI, the blueprint for building resilient, capable human minds has been with us for millennia.
AI-proofing is simpler than people think. Step 1: use AI for 15 minutes today. Step 2: do it again tomorrow. Step 3: repeat for 30 days. That's it. You don't need a course, a certification, or a strategy retreat. You need to draft one email with ChatGPT and see that it's better and faster. The habit forms naturally from there.
Spot on, Mohanbir.
“Disrupting the learning process that builds expertise” is the real strategic risk here.
In the rush to optimise costs with AI, companies are quietly dismantling their entry-level pipelines. It looks efficient in the short term — but five years from now, it creates a structural expertise gap.
And that gap will matter.
Because effective use of AI isn’t about access — it’s about judgement:
– asking the right questions
– knowing when the answers are wrong, incomplete, or misleading
That judgement is built, not downloaded.
Remove the layer where it develops, and you don’t get leverage — you get dependency.
What’s surprising is how few CEOs are being asked the obvious question: if entry-level roles disappear, where does the next generation of expertise actually come from?
That’s not efficiency. It’s deferred risk — and it will show up exactly when firms need real expertise the most.
Thanks for sharing this Professor!
I have been following your writing on Li and your course as well with Kellogg on AI. I do feel there is leverage for senior professionals atleast for now to combine their expertise and judgement with AI for better lever and faster execution, but wondering that’s only because we haven’t seen AI disrupting this as yet as it’s disrupting the middle and entry level order as you also pointed out in your article. Do you see that holding or it’s only a matter of time ?
Great insights as always, Professor Sawhney. This is such a critical message for the modern professional. Understanding how to stay relevant and more importantly, how to avoid the 'zombie' trap of obsolete skills is a lesson everyone needs to address right now
Thank you, Neeraj
Loved the analogy and emphasis on real-life experience that needs to exist in order to leverage and amplify the output. I am a parent of two high school kids and go through the anxiety of what you are describing.
Lol! Five kids here - last one still in college!
We are all in the same boat!
Mohan, great perspective on this. Keep pushing this as the education system needs to realize that what we need to learn and how we need to learn have to be reimagined and reinvented.
Trying to do my bit!
And doing it very well!
Indeed. I have met the enemy, and it is us!
Let’s lead the charge to incite change. That’s the way to pave the future and pay it forward. Yes?