> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://theaihandbook.leomohan.net/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://theaihandbook.leomohan.net/chapter-6-who-should-not-use-ai.md). # Chapter 6: Who Should NOT Use AI? ### The “Caution” List **Q1: Are there people who should avoid using AI altogether?** **A:** Not entirely avoid, but approach with extreme caution. Anyone in a position of critical, irreversible decision-making, or anyone who cannot verify the AI’s output, should be very careful. AI is a tool, not an authority. **Q2: Should a judge use AI to decide a sentence?** **A:** No. Absolutely not. A sentence requires understanding nuance, remorse, intent, and context—human qualities an AI cannot grasp. Using AI for this would reduce justice to a mathematical formula and strip away human compassion. **Q3: Should a therapist use AI to diagnose a patient?** **A:** No. Therapy is built on human trust, empathy, and deep understanding. An AI cannot build a therapeutic alliance or pick up on the subtle emotional cues that are critical to mental health treatment. It might assist with admin, not diagnosis. **Q4: Should a parent use AI to raise their child?** **A:** No. Parenting requires unconditional love, intuition, and being present. An AI can suggest age-appropriate activities but cannot replace bedtime stories, comfort after a nightmare, or the million small moments that build a relationship. **Q5: Should someone with no expertise in a field use AI to make critical decisions in that field?** **A:** No. This is the “blind leading the blind” problem. If you know nothing about plumbing, and an AI tells you to “use a pipe wrench to loosen the main valve,” you won’t know if that’s brilliant advice or something that will flood your house. **Q6: Should a journalist use AI to write a story without fact-checking?** **A:** No. AI can and does make up facts, names, and quotes that sound plausible but are completely false. Publishing without verification is professional malpractice. **Q7: Should a hiring manager let AI make the final hiring decision?** **A:** No. AI might filter out candidates based on patterns, but it cannot assess culture fit, passion, potential, or the human connection that makes a great employee. The final “yes” must come from a human. **Q8: Should a diplomat use AI to negotiate a sensitive international treaty?** **A:** No. Diplomacy requires reading the room, understanding unspoken cultural cues, building trust over time, and making nuanced judgments. AI cannot feel the tension in a room or understand the weight of historical grievances. **Q9: Should a police officer use AI to decide whether to use force?** **A:** No. Split-second, life-or-death decisions require human judgment, training, and accountability. Removing the human from this loop would be ethically and legally disastrous. **Q10: Should someone with a strong confirmation bias use AI for research?** **A:** Be very careful. If you ask an AI “Why is my political opponent wrong about everything?”, it will happily generate a list of reasons, reinforcing your biases. It won’t give you a balanced view unless you specifically ask for it. **Q11: Should a student use AI to complete assignments they haven’t learned?** **A:** No. That’s not using a tool; that’s outsourcing your education. If you use AI to write a paper on the Civil War, the AI learns about the Civil War, and you learn nothing. You’re paying tuition for the machine’s education, not yours. **Q12: Should an artist who wants to develop their personal style use AI?** **A:** Probably not in the early stages. Relying on AI to generate art can become a crutch that prevents you from developing your own unique voice and fundamental skills. Learn the rules first, then use tools to break them. **Q13: Should a historian use AI to analyze historical documents without understanding the context?** **A:** No. AI might miss satire, sarcasm, or cultural references that require deep historical context. It could interpret a satirical pamphlet as a literal news report. The historian’s expertise is essential to interpret the AI’s findings. **Q14: Should a military commander use AI to decide whether to launch a weapon?** **A:** This is one of the most debated ethical questions of our time. The current consensus among experts is a firm **no**. Removing human judgment from the decision to take a human life crosses a critical ethical line. **Q15: Should an accountant use AI to file taxes without reviewing the numbers?** **A:** No. AI can make mathematical errors or misinterpret tax code nuances. The accountant’s professional responsibility is to verify the work, and they are still legally liable for mistakes, not the AI company. **Q16: Should a chef use AI to create their signature dish?** **A:** Probably not. A signature dish comes from a chef’s personal journey, memories, and experimentation. AI might generate an interesting combination of ingredients, but it will lack the soul and story that makes a dish truly special. **Q17: Should a public relations professional use AI to write a crisis apology?** **A:** No. Crisis communication requires genuine remorse and careful wording that understands the specific emotional state of the public. An AI-generated apology will sound generic, calculated, and insincere—making the crisis worse. **Q18: Should someone with poor digital literacy use complex AI tools unsupervised?** **A:** No. If you don’t understand how to protect your privacy, spot hallucinations, or craft good prompts, you could easily be misled, share sensitive data, or make decisions based on bad information. **Q19: Should a comedian use AI to write their stand-up routine?** **A:** No. Comedy is about personal perspective, timing, and connecting with a live audience. AI-generated jokes might be structurally sound, but they’ll lack the authentic voice and lived experience that makes comedy resonate. **Q20: Should anyone use AI for something they wouldn’t feel comfortable admitting to?** **A:** This is perhaps the best personal litmus test. If you’d be embarrassed to tell someone you used AI for a task—whether it’s writing a love letter, completing a work assignment, or making a decision—that’s a strong sign you probably shouldn’t be using it for that purpose. *** 💬 Enjoyed this chapter? Have questions or thoughts?\ Join the discussion on GitHub → [**Click here to Comment**](https://github.com/leomohan/theAIhandbook/discussions) --- # Agent Instructions This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com. ## Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter: ``` GET https://theaihandbook.leomohan.net/chapter-6-who-should-not-use-ai.md?ask= ``` The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.