It's fascinating reading about the demise of human doctors, engineers, architects. All made obsolete by the rise of artificial intelligence.

I'm irked by this talk.

I don't deny the benefits of instant recall, analysis devoid of emotion and all the powers that come with binary based, self learning systems.

Neither do I deny the benefits of empathy, soft signals, people based communication.

i suspect the reality is one of Iain M Banks Culture novels, augmentation not replacement.

So I've been looking for a way to explain the best of both worlds.

"Artificial" is an ugly word. It resonates with artifice, despite its honest hand hewn origins.

Watching Dr Who recently I heard a phrase from my undergrad days "wet brain", of course as a medic this is an out of date name for an alcohol induced brain disease, but through the wit of the writer (Frank Cotterell-Boyce) it was paired with Dry Brain; Human and artificial intelligences placed side by side, neither replacing the other.

Suddenly it seems much easier and more honest to recognise the two different, distinct and possibly equally valuable intelligences.

For risk analysis, hypothesis generation and decision support a dry brain is clearly the best tool. But for tears, empathy, honest explanation, and nuance a wet brain is essential.

I have a motto for the registrars, my own "House of God" rule,

"people don't care how much you know, they need to know how much you care."

However, accepting the synergy of wet and dry brains means we can offer our patients both knowledge and care.

If we ever founded a Royal College of Informatics perhaps I can suggest the motto might be:

Cum Cognitionis, Caritas

The best of both brains.