> No written instructions for an art can yield results clear or certain, Socrates states, but rather can only remind those that already know what writing is about. Furthermore, writings are silent; they cannot speak, answer questions, or come to their own defense.
We have created the very situation that Socrates likely never thought possible, or even likely or desirable. We're in new territory, but Sophists and sophistry will always be with us. I think this study is important food for thought.
I think that link is the same pre-print for the same paper that someone posted in the other thread, but it seems to redirect/resolve to this, possibly because their system doesn’t let you hotlink to the download if I had to guess:
> Endoscopist deskilling risk after exposure to artificial intelligence in colonoscopy: a multicentre, observational study
Also available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(25)00133-5
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S24681...
I haven't yet found the full text, so if someone else has a pre-print or something, that would perhaps aid the discussion.
In the news:
https://www.medpagetoday.com/gastroenterology/coloncancer/11...
> Relying on AI in Colonoscopies May Erode Clinicians' Skills
Maybe Socrates had a point after all:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaedrus_(dialogue)#Discussion...
> No written instructions for an art can yield results clear or certain, Socrates states, but rather can only remind those that already know what writing is about. Furthermore, writings are silent; they cannot speak, answer questions, or come to their own defense.
We have created the very situation that Socrates likely never thought possible, or even likely or desirable. We're in new territory, but Sophists and sophistry will always be with us. I think this study is important food for thought.
We shape our tools, and our tools shape us.