How is it not a contradiction? You say “people who are the worst at thinking” when it’s the people who are the best at thinking that use it the most, because they get to spend more time thinking by outsourcing the low-thinking tasks to AI.
It seems you might have different assumptions on who works which jobs. Factory workers span the whole range of people who are great at thinking and people who are bad at thinking. So do scientists/engineers/doctors. I don’t think I would agree that only those “who are worst at thinking use AI the most”, but if it were the case, then evidence that scientists/engineers/doctors are the people using the tool the most does not invalidate the claim. It could just means that those who are in those jobs and are bad at it are also the ones using AI.
Implying there’s some kind of contradiction here? Why would you need to out-source your “thinking” if your job doesn’t require “thinking”?
How is it not a contradiction? You say “people who are the worst at thinking” when it’s the people who are the best at thinking that use it the most, because they get to spend more time thinking by outsourcing the low-thinking tasks to AI.
It seems you might have different assumptions on who works which jobs. Factory workers span the whole range of people who are great at thinking and people who are bad at thinking. So do scientists/engineers/doctors. I don’t think I would agree that only those “who are worst at thinking use AI the most”, but if it were the case, then evidence that scientists/engineers/doctors are the people using the tool the most does not invalidate the claim. It could just means that those who are in those jobs and are bad at it are also the ones using AI.