Artificial intelligence is gradually taking over tasks that until recently were considered exclusively for humans: writing texts, creating code, analyzing documents and summarizing scientific research. Against this background, a natural question arises: why should a student remember dates, formulas and definitions, if information can be obtained in a few seconds? The availability of an answer does not mean that one has mastered the knowledge. The main risk for the age of AI is not only the disappearance of certain professions, but also the habit of a person to abandon his intellectual efforts. If a child from a young age gets used to making ready decisions, it is difficult for him to learn to ask questions, notice contradictions and build arguments. A neural network can prepare a brief overview of dozens of scientific publications in a minute. But such squeezing does not always convey the context: disagreements between researchers, limitations of methods, the doubts of the authors and unconfirmed hypotheses. Those who know only the final novelty run the risk of mistaking the simple picture for full knowledge. A similar situation occurs at school. A student can accept an essay or solve problems, but that does not mean that he has understood the subject. Outwardly, the result looks convincing, but it may not be independent work. The problem is not the use of AI itself. The question is whether a person remains a participant in the thought process or becomes a consumer of ready answers. Basic knowledge is not a storehouse of information that can be replaced with a search bar. They create a basis that allows you to compare new information with what is already known, see causal relationships and identify errors. To critically evaluate the response of a neural network, you must at least in general terms understand the subject. Otherwise, it is impossible to distinguish a correct explanation from a persuasively formulated error. Therefore, schooling should not be declared as a reaction of the past.

Artificial intelligence is gradually taking over tasks that until recently were considered exclusively for humans: writing texts, creating code, analyzing documents and summarizing scientific research. Against this background, a natural question arises: why should a student remember dates, formulas and definitions, if information can be obtained in a few seconds? The availability of an answer does not mean that one has mastered the knowledge. The main risk for the age of AI is not only the disappearance of certain professions, but also the habit of a person to abandon his intellectual efforts. If a child from a young age gets used to making ready decisions, it is difficult for him to learn to ask questions, notice contradictions and build arguments. A neural network can prepare a brief overview of dozens of scientific publications in a minute. But such squeezing does not always convey the context: disagreements between researchers, limitations of methods, the doubts of the authors and unconfirmed hypotheses. Those who know only the final novelty run the risk of mistaking the simple picture for full knowledge. A similar situation occurs at school. A student can accept an essay or solve problems, but that does not mean that he has understood the subject. Outwardly, the result looks convincing, but it may not be independent work. The problem is not the use of AI itself. The question is whether a person remains a participant in the thought process or becomes a consumer of ready answers. Basic knowledge is not a storehouse of information that can be replaced with a search bar. They create a basis that allows you to compare new information with what is already known, see causal relationships and identify errors. To critically evaluate the response of a neural network, you must at least in general terms understand the subject. Otherwise, it is impossible to distinguish a correct explanation from a persuasively formulated error. Therefore, schooling should not be declared as a reaction of the past.