On the two cultures front, my education late last century was already nearly essay-free.

Maybe there's a way forward for the humanities where excellent (computer-assisted or not) syntax and grammar is taken as a baseline, and the focus could be entirely on the semantics of the work?

(a question intermediate between syntax and semantics: how good is AI at explicating the mappings back and forth from the extant literature, eg https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_5110/snow_1... or https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327416528_Syntax_Se... ?)

(edit: Q2. how good is AI at outlining, eg producing a debate flow?)

It is not dead because it is still a good exercise to help you how to think in a structured way

Why walk when you can drive? Why hunt when you can go to the grocery store? Why do structured thinking when AI will do it for you?

You could be in tremendous physical form, have awesome skills with a spear, and be an intellectual powerhouse, but none of that is worth as much going forward as it was in the past.

The point is exercise. You don't run to get anywhere, you run for the sake of running and the benefits it has.

Historically Those are secondary benefits. The primary benefit was that locomoting got you somewhere you needed to go. That part isn't so important anymore. Most don't bother because it's optional.