Choosing Depth
in Small, Human Ways
As I was scrolling through Instagram, a carousel post grabbed my attention.
The post had twenty slides, each with a bold statement. They warned about skimming instead of reading, described attention as a muscle, and suggested that slowing down could push back against anti-intellectualism.
The message made sense to me. In fact, it felt familiar.
What stuck with me was not just the message, but the way it was delivered.
Swipeable.
Brief.
Confident.
Each slide shared a quick idea and encouraged me to keep swiping. I felt the urge to move on, but I decided to pause.
It wasn’t that I disagreed; it was that the format seemed to be part of the message. That pause is what led me here.
When people talk about anti-intellectualism, it’s often framed as rejecting expertise or professional knowledge in favor of “common sense.” That’s not what I’m pointing to.
What I notice is more subtle. There’s a slow loss of attention and a growing impatience with depth. Are we becoming less comfortable with sustained thinking?
It’s not that we don’t care. We’re operating inside systems that reward speed, volume, and immediacy. Attention doesn’t hold up well under chronic stress. When people are tired, hungry, anxious, or stretched thin, it’s unrealistic to expect deep learning to come easily.
Perhaps this is why it’s so easy to exploit. When people feel under constant pressure, attention becomes fragile.
Short form everywhere, deep attention nowhere
Short-form content is everywhere now.
Reels.
Clips.
Carousels.
Summaries.
Highlights.
Short-form content isn’t always bad. It can spark interest, draw people in, and introduce ideas we might not find otherwise.
But when short-form content becomes the norm, something changes.
We get used to what we practice. When information comes fast and in small bits, we become better at skimming and less able to handle complex ideas.
Deep reading starts to feel uncomfortable. Long conversations start to feel inefficient. Nuance begins to feel like friction.
We haven’t lost our ability to think deeply. We’ve just gotten used to not lingering.
AI at work, without guidance
I notice a similar pattern in how work is changing.
Organizations are adopting AI quickly, often without clear plans or shared expectations for how thinking should develop with these tools. I see this as having access without intention.
Instead of bringing clarity, this often creates more noise. Speed and volume become more important, so work may look finished but hasn’t been carefully thought through.
AI-drafted workshops. AI-generated decks. AI-written updates. Summaries of summaries.
Much of this work is shared before there’s time to review, refine, or reflect.
More reports show that while AI can boost output, it can also lead to low-quality work that consumes time without improving judgment or decision-making. Some call this workslop.
The problem isn’t AI itself. It’s how we use it. If we’re not careful, tools designed to help us think can end up replacing our thinking.
Summaries instead of understanding
I observe this pull in myself, too.
Choosing summaries over books. Skimming for main points in place of engaging in full arguments. Wanting someone to just tell me what I need to know.
But real understanding doesn’t come just from pulling out the main points.
It comes from spending time with an idea, noticing its limits, sitting with contradictions, and allowing uncertainty before things become clear.
Reading something from start to finish matters—not to show off intelligence, but because it builds patience, synthesis, and good judgment. These human skills are even more important as digital tools and AI change how we learn and make decisions.
When curiosity becomes a liability
This is what concerns me most.
Authentic curiosity, asking to understand, to clarify, to explore, is often misunderstood. As resistance. As overthinking. As being “too discerning.”
In some places, asking questions can slow things down. As a result, curiosity is quietly discouraged, even when it’s well-intentioned.
When we stop valuing curiosity and depth, learning turns into just following rules. Decisions might seem confident, but they become fragile when tested.
That’s not loud anti-intellectualism. It’s a more subtle form. It’s a slow fading of thoughtful thinking.
What resistance looks like to me
Resisting this pull doesn’t require dramatic acts.
It looks small.
Intentional.
Human.
It looks like:
Reading one thing all the way through.
Pausing before reacting or reposting.
Asking, “How do we know this?” without apology.
Using AI to generate questions, not just answers.
Creating space for sense-making, not merely reporting.
It means treating attention as something worth protecting.
Not to feel superior.
Not to be academic.
But to stay awake.
Maybe this is the quiet work we need to do now, especially in a world that values speed. Protecting our capacity to think deeply. Choosing to slow down when everything else urges us forward.
Thinking deeply is not a luxury. It’s a stabilizing force.
Clarity calms the nervous system.
Discernment is a form of care.
A Scribble to Sit With
What looks like distraction is often survival.
Where has speed quietly taken the place of real thought in your life?
If this sparked a thought or question, I’d love to hear it. You can share it in the comments, or leave a quiet signal by tapping the ❤️
©2026 | All images are my own unless otherwise indicated