LexisNexis: Why AI should not and will not replace lawyers and judges

Written by Ana Stanič, founder of E&A Law The whole discourse of AI replacing lawyers and judges is based on a mechanistic understanding of the world.  Already by the beginning of 20th century physics has revealed to us that we do not live in a Newtonian world. Quantum physics, chaos theory and systems thinking tell us that the world is not one large probabilistic calculation, that may not even be cause and effect in a linear sense and that everything is relational.  And yet the hype about AI dominates the airways and there is talk about AI replacing lawyers, arbitrators and judges.  AI output is based on complex probabilistic calculations rather than intelligible ‘reasoning’ which in the case of law is above all a matter of judgement, assessment and interpretation. A legal analysis, an award and judgement are made up of a multitude of decision-making factors which cannot and should not be formalised a priori, and are typically based on judgement as to: What the relevant facts are;…