Many people here are taking away from this that substituting our own writing with the writing from an LLM is a danger for human development.

I see things more optimistically. If good writing leads to good thinking, then anything I do to improve my ability to write well transitively helps me to think well.

In that sense, I actually see a huge benefit to LLMs in improving my writing and therefore improving my thinking. Not only can I ask for detailed and powerful feedback, I can also ask for more details on background context or related topics that I wouldn't be aware of.

I believe judicious use of LLMs can make us better than we could be without them.

I subscribe to this view. LLMs can be tools for thinking, not substitutes to thinking. In fact, I feel that with time, the way we think may fundamentally change, just like how reading and writing changed thinking. An LLM can be an ideal foil to test out ideas, and the process of thinking could be an iterative process with the LLM as an active participant.