Test yourself
9 questions
01
The essay opens with the anaesthetist's arterial waveform moment. What does the author conclude about the reasoning behind that rapid response?
AIt was pure instinct with no rational basis
BIt was conscious clinical reasoning performed at high speed
CIt felt like instinct but was, in truth, statistical – pattern recognition compressed from thousands of cases
The essay describes the trainee's hands moving before conscious understanding arrives, then reveals that the reasoning was always there – compressed into something that felt like instinct but was weighted probabilities from accumulated experience.
02
What specifically unsettled the author about his conversation with the language model?
AThat it could perform surgery autonomously
BThat it made visible how much of what he calls expertise is mechanical – pattern matching, not irreducible clinical intuition
CThat it demonstrated consciousness indistinguishable from a human physician
The essay is explicit: the unease was not about replacement. It was about the realisation that a very large portion of expertise is mechanical pattern recognition – and a machine can perform that pattern recognition without consciousness, a body, or clinical experience.
03
According to the essay, what has the current generation of language models done to Polanyi's concept of tacit knowledge?
ANot refuted it, but redrawn its border – the territory Polanyi described is smaller than assumed and still shrinking
BCompletely refuted it by proving all knowledge can be made explicit
CConfirmed it by failing to replicate any form of clinical judgement
The essay argues that language models have not eliminated the tacit dimension but have shown that a significant portion of what was assumed to be ineffable is actually pattern recognition below conscious awareness – shrinking the territory Polanyi described.
04
The essay states that the disquieting question for skilled professionals is not whether the machine can do their job, but:
AWhether they will be made redundant within five years
BWhat proportion of their job was pattern recognition all along, and what remains once that is made visible
CWhether they should retrain in a different profession
The essay frames the professional unease not as fear of replacement but as an identity question: what is genuinely, irreducibly yours once the mechanical portion of expertise is revealed?
05
What does the author identify as the irreducible element that remains once pattern recognition is separated from expertise?
ASuperior medical knowledge accumulated over decades
BThe ability to process information faster than a machine
CResponsibility – the willingness to decide, own the outcome, and bear the weight of being wrong
The essay explicitly rules out knowledge, pattern recognition, memory, and calculation. What remains is responsibility – and specifically the fact that there is someone behind the decision who will bear the consequences of it.
06
Why does the author say he wants to be careful with the responsibility argument?
ABecause he has watched it used as a sedative – the same reassurance physicians used when dismissing the internet's impact on medicine
BBecause he believes responsibility will soon be automated as well
CBecause he thinks the argument is fundamentally wrong
The essay explicitly warns against using the responsibility distinction as a sedative, comparing it to physicians who said "the internet will never replace the textbook." The distinction is real today, but its trajectory deserves scrutiny.
07
According to the essay, the pressure on the responsibility distinction will come from:
AMachines achieving consciousness
BInstitutions – insurers preferring auditable algorithms, hospitals preferring standardised protocols, clients preferring cheaper AI-generated outputs
CGovernment regulation mandating AI replacement of professional roles
The essay argues the pressure comes from institutional economics: automated protocols reduce variation, algorithmic decisions reduce liability, and the space in which a physician exercises genuine judgement narrows each year – not because judgement was wrong, but because the institution found a way to route around it.
08
The essay draws an analogy between AI expansion and a clinical phenomenon. What is the analogy?
AAn immune response that strengthens the host over time
BA chronic disease that stabilises with proper management
CA system that grows by consuming the resources of its host, becoming more integrated and harder to remove – without needing intentions
The essay draws a deliberate parallel with a pathological process – a system that follows its own logic of expansion without requiring intentions, becoming more essential and more difficult to remove with each passing month.
09
The essay's title distinguishes between a mirror and a window. What is the difference as the author defines it?
AA mirror reflects your own patterns back at you; a window shows something that exists independently of your looking
BA mirror distorts reality while a window presents it accurately
CA mirror is analogue technology while a window represents digital innovation
The essay's closing argument: the danger is mistaking fluency for understanding – interpreting the mirror as a window. A window shows something that exists independently. The author is not certain we are building windows.
Read the full article →
Find out what you got wrong – and why it matters.