Connor Gengle

Directly engaging Dr. Plate's "Agency Paradox," Connor argues that the fear of AI eliminating thinking misunderstands the technology. AI shifts cognitive effort from execution (drafting, calculating, retrieving) to evaluation and direction (what to ask, what to do with the answer, what's wrong with this output). The "agency paradox" is resolved not by restriction but by design: systems that keep humans genuinely in charge of decisions, not just nominally.

A ban on AI in education is a policy that avoids the real challenge: teaching students to use AI ethically and effectively. The real problem isn't the tool -- it's the absence of frameworks for responsible use. Banning AI leaves students unprepared for environments where AI is ubiquitous and expected, while teaching its proper use builds the metacognitive skills that actually serve them.

Argues that institutional bans on AI tools miss the point. The challenge isn't preventing access but building judgment. Students who encounter AI-free zones are left without the skills to navigate environments where AI is standard. Policy should focus on frameworks for ethical use, not prohibition.

Examines how inadequate nutrition undermines athletic performance at every level -- energy availability, recovery, cognitive function, and injury resistance. Argues that nutrition is not a lifestyle choice but infrastructure for athletic success, and that athletes and institutions alike underinvest in it relative to its impact.

Examines PED use not as an individual moral failure but as a structural response to competitive pressure. When the system rewards results above everything and the gap between athletes is razor-thin, PEDs emerge as rational (if prohibited) choices. Argues for structural reforms alongside enforcement.

Examines the NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) era in college athletics. On one hand, NIL restores fairness by compensating athletes for value they already generate; on the other, it creates new inequities as recruiting becomes partly a bidding war. Asks whether the net effect is a more just system or simply a different set of distortions.

Documents the science of sleep deprivation and athletic performance: reaction time, decision-making, injury risk, and recovery all degrade measurably without adequate sleep. Argues that sleep is the most undervalued performance variable in elite sport -- structurally disadvantaged by travel schedules, early practices, and cultural norms that treat rest as weakness.

Directly responds to concerns about AI eliminating human cognition. Argues the concern is based on a static model of thinking: AI doesn't remove the need to think, it relocates it -- from lower-level execution to higher-level evaluation and direction. The student who uses AI well is still thinking; they're thinking at a different level.

Response to Dr. Plate's "Agency Paradox." Agrees that student agency is central to learning but argues it extends to the choice of tools. Students who are denied AI tools in educational contexts don't develop the judgment to use them responsibly -- they just use them less deliberately outside the classroom. Genuine agency includes being trusted to navigate AI with guidance.

Dr. Plate — "The Agency Paradox" (direct response in two posts)

Responds to: Dr. Plate's "Agency Paradox" (two posts engaging the AI-and-thinking question)

Thematic overlap: Jaden Walker (AI in education, student agency); Sam Levine and Brayden Wilson (sports health and performance); Zay Amaro and Gabriel Bell (sports ethics)

Distinctive approach: Connor writes in two distinct registers — analytic arguments about AI policy and evidence-based arguments about sports physiology — but both share a pragmatic ethics: what structures actually serve human flourishing versus what structures create harm through inattention or misaligned incentives.