Dive 103: Agency in the Age of AI

Gaining control over your life.

Alvin

Mar 25, 2025

Article voiceover

1×

0:00

-10:10

A calculator can be a temporary aid or a permanent one. — Your choice: technology can either augment you or replace you.

Hey, it’s Alvin!

I was asked whether I was afraid AI would take my job because I work as a software developer.

No.

At least, not yet.

AI still generates too much garbage code. When the codebase is big enough, it can’t capture enough context to spit out code that works well.

This is partly why I also don’t use AI to generate writing. This and because I’m a big believer that:

Writing is thinking.

What got me thinking about this was a recent post by

Gurwinder

who suggested that AI might result from or cause you to lose your sense of agency—control over your life, which can adversely affect your well-being. Gurwinder believes we give up our agency willingly because human beings are “averse to thinking.” His solution? You should write more. But is that enough?

There’s a more powerful way to seize control over your life that we can piece together by breaking down Gurwinder’s assumptions about people and what agency really is. His post is a good read, but you’ll be able to understand what I’ll dive into today without having read it.

Let’s set one thing straight right away…

1. There is more than one type of agency.

There are two types of agency:

The feeling of agency
Actual agency

The two don’t always align.

What we want is actual agency. Because the feeling of agency is too volatile without it.

Marketers know this. So, they like to play with the consumer’s feeling of agency. Marketers give us the illusion that we have less agency than we believe and that we’ll have more agency than we actually gain by buying their product, service, or idea.

For example, one of AI’s biggest selling points right now is that it will help people save time—that it will give people more control over their time. True or not, marketers want you to feel that you’ll have more agency using AI.

Marketers knew this long before AI.

Revolv was a company that sold smart home hubs that let you control your entire home from your smartphone. Lights, locks, thermostats… you name it. Nothing like the agency of controlling every aspect of your house from the palm of your hand, right?

Well, that’s the marketing spiel.

That’s the illusion.

In 2016, Revolv was bought out, their devices were bricked, and that’s when customers realized, “oh shit, my house will stop working.” In a way, Revolv’s customers never had the actual agency they felt they had compared to those who didn’t have smart homes.

I said the feeling of agency is volatile. What do I mean?

2. Social comparison affects the feeling of agency.

One way marketers manipulate your feeling of agency is by comparing your situation with others…

Don’t you want to work more efficiently than your peers? Then use our AI tool!

Because marketers know our feeling of agency changes depending on who we compare ourselves to. That’s one way the feeling of agency is volatile. It’s not:

“Do I feel high agency?”

It’s:

“Do I feel high agency relative to others.”

Revolv’s customers probably felt more agency when comparing themselves to those without smart homes until their smart home hubs turned to bricks.

Actual agency is much more stable. Unlike the feeling of agency, marketers can’t mess with your actual agency because your actual agency depends on your skills, experiences, and talents.

Your actual agency depends on you.

It’s easy to confuse the two. But I find a decent rule-of-thumb is:

When we’re talking about the feeling of agency, we ask questions like, “how much control do I have?”
When we’re talking about actual agency, we ask questions like, “what am I capable of?”

But let’s be real about actual agency…

3. No one has high actual agency in all areas of life.

We already know that the feeling of agency is relative. But Gurwinder’s post also suggests you only either have high agency or low agency. Is that true?

A person who loves writing is less likely to defer entirely to what AI generates. They have higher agency in their writing. But if they spend a ton of time writing, they’ll have less time every day for other activities. Like cooking. They might go out or order in more often for meals. Whether it’s delivery, a meal kit, or a frozen dinner. They likely have lower agency in cooking or some other areas of their lives.

While it’s possible for a person to have low agency in all areas of their life, no one has high agency in all areas of their life. It’s more accurate to say that most people are “high agency” in some aspects of their lives, while “low agency” in others.

While our feeling of agency might be flaky and easily manipulated, we have much more control over our actual agency. So why do we ever give it up?

4. People don’t like thinking… sometimes.

Gurwinder’s post mentions that humans give up actual agency because humans are averse to thinking. Implying people would rather let AI think for them. His evidence is a study that says people would rather shock themselves than to be left alone with their thoughts.

Except, that’s not what the study shows.

By debunking some myths about it, we can uncover the deeper reasons it might seem like people “don’t like thinking.”

In one setup, the experiment left participants sitting in an empty room. Personally, I need to engage with the outside world for thoughts to flow. An empty room won’t do that. Unsurprisingly, most participants found it “hard to concentrate.” You can’t think without concentrating. So, I’m unconvinced that they were thinking at all. Bored, maybe.

It also makes no sense that the researchers considered “engaging in an external activity” or “getting up out of their chair” as evidence that people would rather not think. Because those actions can lead to thinking. I do my best thinking while pacing around a room or taking a stroll.

There are plenty of people who would agree that some of our best thinking happens in the shower when we’re free from almost all external distractions. They’re pleasant and I don’t know anyone who’d rather shock themselves than play with shower thoughts.

What the researchers failed to consider was that leaving people in a featureless room to “just think” involves no thinking at all. And that “external activities” stimulate thoughts, which can make thinking more enjoyable.

All of that to say, the study draws questionable conclusions. I don’t think people have an “aversion to thinking.” I think sometimes it just looks that way… on the surface. But…

It’s true that people don’t always think hard about everything. That might entice people to use AI to generate code, writing, and other content. But there are practical reasons for that deeper than just “humans are lazy.”

The rationale is biological. It’s physical. It’s simple.

5. Time is precious.

We have a finite amount of time in this world that gives us an infinite number of things to think about.

So, if you’re going to think deeply about something, you have to devote time to it.

But that leaves less thinking time for other things.

This is clearly shown in TikTok street interviews that show young Americans unable to think of five countries outside the USA but can name all the Kardashians and probably what they ate for breakfast.

We live in an age of distractions boosted by clever marketing tactics that pull us away from the things that matter most to us.

In fact, a person might feel less agentic because they feel there are an infinite number of things they’re told to care about, but a finite amount of time to do so.

It’s not that people don’t think. Or don’t like to think. It’s that people are selective about what they think. Because the modern world offers too much to think about.

Most of what we’re told to think about aren’t even things we can control much (or at all) as individuals, no matter how much the 24/7 news cycle and activists try to impose duties on us. So, is it any wonder that modern distractions kill our sense of agency?

God, grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change
the courage to change the things I can
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Just as people are selective in how they think, people are just as selective about how they use technology to make the most of their time. For better or for worse.

6. There is more than one way to use technology.

Gurwinder assumes we give up agency because we have an aversion to thinking. But this misses a critical point about technology and its role in life.

Human beings have always used technology to either:

Augment a skill, or
Replace a skill

AI is just another technology.

So, you can either use AI to replace your writing skills, or you can use AI to improve your writing skills.

It’s a conscious choice.

And those with the most agency are those who favour augmentation over replacement. Recognizing this as a deliberate decision is the first step to growing your actual agency. But giving up actual agency isn’t inherently bad, either.

The reality is we have limited time in this world.

You will not attain the highest actual agency in all areas of your life.

Sometimes, it makes sense to trade away actual agency to finish certain tasks faster, so we can focus on what matters most to us. Company founders hire employees for that reason.

The key to maximizing agency is to make sure it’s a conscious trade-off. That you’re not doing it just because someone told you to.

The second key is to know and focus on what matters most to you. So, it’s harder for manipulative marketers to pull you off track with illusions of agency through social comparisons. Once you accept that you don’t have time for everything, you’ll be able to focus on the few things that matter most to you. And saying “no” to everything else. You regain control over your own life right away.