Interview: "AI Is Like a Politician – Talks a Lot but Doesn’t Always Deliver" – Political Science Student on Using AI at University

"Politics is all about thinking through positions, debating, and critically checking sources. If you let a machine do all of that, all you really learn is how to write prompts – and that's not exactly the art of government," says Leon, 23, a Political Science undergrad at the University of Cologne. He uses AI, but with his own set of rules.

Editorial Team: Do you use AI tools for your studies?

Leonard: Yes, but very selectively. I don’t see AI as a universal solution, more like a tool for tedious busywork. I use ChatGPT for quick structural ideas or to get a rough overview of certain topics. But political science relies on working with sources—and for that, I trust JSTOR or actual library databases more than AI, which sometimes just makes things up.

Editorial Team: What do you like using AI for the most?

Leonard: If I need to draft a policy paper, sometimes I’ll ask AI for a rough outline—it helps me get started more quickly. AI is also interesting for exploring different sides of a debate—like a kind of sparring partner. However, when it comes to real argumentation, I rely on my own thinking, otherwise you stop learning about political thought patterns.

Editorial Team: Has AI changed your studies?

Leonard: Only a little. Sure, it saves time in the prep phase. But in my field, the thinking counts more than just producing text. I’d even say: AI has shown me how crucial it is to develop my own judgment. I don’t want my arguments to sound like some government press release.

Editorial Team: What other AI tools do you know?

Leonard: Aside from ChatGPT, I tried Perplexity once—it feels a bit like a cross between Google and Wikipedia, but with full sentences. For things like images or presentation ideas, I think Midjourney is pretty cool, even if that’s more of a fun side note in political science.

Editorial Team: What’s your overall view on AI in your studies?

Leonard: Mixed. AI can help you work faster. But political science is also about reading political texts critically and understanding their context. If you just accept AI’s output blindly, you’ll end up with technically correct, but intellectually empty essays. That’s like passing a law in politics without reading the fine print.

Editorial Team: Does AI make sense in your field?

Leonard: Yes, but only in specific situations. It’s good as an idea booster, writing aide, or time manager. Study schedules? I don’t need them—I don’t study by the clock, but based on what interests me. But for people who tend to get lost in the material, AI could be a real help.

Editorial Team: What risks do you see?

Leonard: First: Political naïveté. AI can only sketch debates in broad strokes—often without the ideological sharpness that’s crucial in politics. Second: Homogenization. If everyone uses the same tools, individual thinking and writing styles fade. Third: Laziness. Instead of doing your own research, you let the tool dictate the easy way.

Editorial Team: Morally acceptable?

Leonard: Depends. If you use AI as a tool—sure. If you let it do all the work—it’s more problematic. In politics, you’d say: if you give up decision-making authority, you give up power. It’s the same at university.

Editorial Team: Should AI be regulated?

Leonard: Maybe there should be a transparency requirement—like a footnote: "This paragraph was created with AI assistance." Not to punish anyone, but to make things clear. But honestly, it’s not likely to be enforced everywhere.

Editorial Team: Risk of plagiarism?

Leonard: Yeah, and even more than that: the risk that people stop thinking critically. You can catch plagiarism eventually—but mental laziness is much harder to spot.

Editorial Team: What would your ideal AI look like?

Leonard: One that doesn’t just suggest what I could write, but actually pushes me to create counterarguments. A kind of digital opposition leader during my writing process—always challenging, always critical.

Conclusion: For Leon, AI is neither friend nor foe, but more of a political sparring partner: useful, but risky if you get too dependent. “In politics, you always have to know who holds the pen,” he says. “The same goes for uni. I’ll let AI write with me sometimes, but I’m not letting it run the show.”