The Epistemic Downside of Using LLM-Based Generative AI in Academic Writing
Bor Luen Tang
Why it has this license class
AChecked 30 Sept 2026. Open license (CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, CC0, public domain): full text indexed and used in synthesis.
| Source | License | Open-access status | Read as |
|---|---|---|---|
| openalex | cc-by | gold | Green |
| crossref | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | — | Green |
| unpaywall | cc-by | gold | Green |
Abstract
BThere is now widespread use of large language (LLM)-based generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in academic research and writing. While these are convenient, quick, and output enhancing, they also arguably incur ethical issues, such as questionable authenticity and plagiarism. Here, I explore epistemological aspects of AI use in academic writing and posit that there is evidence for three related pitfalls in AI use that should not be ignored. These include (1) epistemic detriment or harm in terms of illusions of understanding, (2) potential for cognitive dulling or impairment, and (3) AI dependency (both habitual and/or emotional). Thus, any potential infringements of academic ethics aside, AI use in academic writing incurs intrinsic problems that are epistemic in nature. These epistemic downsides call for restraint and moderation beyond regulatory measures to address ethical issues in AI use.
Claims built on this paper
DNone yet.