Artificial stupidity or logimorphism? How misuse of language warps our thinking about ‘artificial intelligence’
Clicks: 1
ID: 318013
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #36 of 55 articles by views in European Heart Journal - Digital Health
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Artificial intelligence’ (AI) as a blanket term covers many advanced computing techniques that employ divergent methodologies for a wide array of functions. It is too late to affect general usage of the term without qualification—although it is a misnomer—but perhaps not too late to argue for the preferential use of more specific and realistic terminologies when discussing useful applications in science and medicine. Large language models are statistical tools for predicting text; machine learning algorithms are programs that discern patterns from data; and neural networks are mathematical models that predict outputs from inputs. In all cases, the software is unaware of what it is doing or why. The real intelligence is human, exemplified by the expertise of the engineers who designed any particular system, and by the scepticism, realism and vision of those who interpret and apply its outputs. Users may suspend their incredulity if large language models that are not sentient creatures are programmed to answer questions in the first person, since that encourages anthropomorphism. Perhaps we need a new word—which could be ‘logimorphism’—to emphasise the dangers of interacting uncritically with inanimate software programs while overtly or subconsciously ascribing them human cognitive powers. Implementing high standards when applying new computing tools in clinical research and practice should start with the avoidance of inappropriate language that degrades our thinking.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7165138057
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Alan G. Fraser |
| Journal | European Heart Journal - Digital Health |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/ehjdh/ztag095
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.