AI vs. Lawyers :The Battle for Legal Supremacy – Who Will Win the Marathon Race?

AI vs. Lawyers :The Battle for Legal Supremacy

Since the invention of Artificial Intelligence, a problem has suddenly arisen for people associated with service-oriented businesses that generate large-scale employment for society. Some people are surrounded by deep apprehension, while some are busy preparing themselves to deal with its potential dangers. At this strange turn of time, the era of Human v/s Artificial Intelligence is an era of self-created dilemma. Humans are busy searching for evidence of their natural intelligence. But it cannot be denied that this is a terrible mechanical blow after many centuries for a noble profession of high quality like law professionals & attorneys, which is an injustice and threat to this noble service and intelligent profession from the very beginning and the human civilisation may have to pay the price of this injustice for many centuries, just as the ruthless machines of the slaughterhouse do mechanical injustice to the animals without listening to their side. likewise, the new catchy names of machine intelligence can leave the system established for millennia to be subjected to horrific justice in the hands of non-tamper proof robotic algorithms in the absence of just compassion of ethics and legal morality. Another dark side of the matter is that in this blind technological race, in the desire to get ahead, ethics will collapse like a pack of cards, because your fight is with the machine, because it wants to choose between self-learning v/s deep learning and similarly where this sequence will stop, it will be a bit premature to guess at the moment, inventions are made for the benefit of humanity, but when science tries to go so far that man becomes its slave and experiment material, When technology is no longer useful for the human race and tries to replace humans in the form of machine learning and so-called deep learning, such technological opportunities blunt the edge of natural intelligence and create a state of irrationality. If man accepts mechanization as his destiny, then his natural creativity will get lost. He wants to be a part of that blind race because billions of dollars are being spent to earn profits. This technology has been marketed so much on a global level that many learned jurists, lawyers & judges are also almost ready to turn away from their responsibility towards human civilization by ignoring its flaws in the daydream of reduced workload. Amidst the rumblings of this terrible technological tragedy, it is hoped that in the end, the winner will be a man as always & this will be the only way to save humanity and human dignity, justice, morality, and social sensitivity.

Do lawyers and people associated with the law need to be afraid of Artificial Intelligence?

The kind of common sense and logical arguments that a studious lawyer can give, and the kind of conduct that can be displayed in the same situation, cannot be expected from a machine program. The question is not whether the machine understands the language of instructions or the language of technical orders but whether the person giving it instructions is honest or dishonest. And what is the guarantee that this artificial intelligence will not be used to harass innocent people legally? If a technology is not beneficial for human Welfare then it is not a technology but a digital artificial intelligence epidemic, which will destroy the natural creativity of man and turn him into a machine puppet. God forbid this happens but if it does happen then knowledge and thoughtfulness will become things of the past. This problem is not only for lawyers, this problem is a challenge for the entire society, because when all the legal work will start being done by artificial intelligence without quality, then what will be the justification and need for a law degree, or diploma? Will questions be raised on the existence and need of colleges and universities imparting legal education? Then this periodic process can enter the education of every faculty & as a result, society can become teacher less and machine-dependent & the era of study and teaching can end. These questions and apprehensions are not strange, but are relevant from the point of view of the expansion of the subject; one question is also whether human judges will like to listen to the arguments given by machines or will get bored of them. If we think a little further, if the machine can replace the lawyer, then why can’t it replace the judge? So is such an era coming in which judges will give decisions in favor or against humans, convict them, or honorably acquit them after listening to the arguments from machines? If Artificial Intelligence understands the language of the law, then what other language will the judge need to make all the decisions? People arguing in favor of Artificial Intelligence will say that the machine that creates content does not get tired and the machine can do error-free work. The question is not whether we only want error-free work or not, but the bigger question is whether we are getting alienated from natural things. Can everything from judiciary and administration to police and from doctors to engineers and architects be handed over to machines? And if this is not happening, then why not “sir the great”, is artificial intelligence incapable of doing all the other work? Can morality, compassion, justice, social equality, and protection of the interests of women and children be handed over to machines by handing over this automatic remote control mechanism? Can the highest human values ​​enriched with the help of religion and morality be denied with the help of the special software of artificial intelligence? The question is whether the attachment that a lawyer has towards his client, the emotional basis, legal justification foundation, and rational ethics with which he intellectually fights for justice, can the same be expected from a machine-made program. Can the legal responsibility of artificial intelligence be fixed in victory or defeat? What will be the responsibility of artificial intelligence in case of failure or deadlock & what will be its legal consequences? How will the quality of service be determined by consumer laws? Without giving proper answers to these questions, adopting any technology in a hurry would be unfair and grossly unjust.

Some unresolved questions that are in the womb of the future

The question is whether this technology will be for a selected few in the future or will it be further expanded for the general public. And yes, if it expands and becomes accessible to all, then if both the parties, the pros and cons, fight a case with the help of Artificial Intelligence, then how will that case be resolved, because Artificial Intelligence will argue equally for both the parties? These are some unresolved questions that are in the womb of the future and pose a new challenge for those who gave birth to this technology. The way Artificial Intelligence is creating similar content, it is moving towards becoming the biggest parrot of the future that can remember words. Yes, the words have come into existence but they have not acquired proper context and meaning, just like a scholar cannot be born from a pile of books in a library, just like a house cannot be built from a pile of stones, cement and steel, in this way, what is being given the new name of Deep Learning can be defeated by even an ordinary law student. This machine program is meaningless compared to the human brain, comparison is usually made in similar elements. Why compare innate intelligence and artificial intelligence? The basis of both the concept is different, conclusions drawn from such a context can be misleading and create absurdity. Many times legal facts prepared through artificial intelligence can be flawed, false, beyond facts, and misleading. Justice cannot be achieved by relying on possibilities. If injustice is done to even a single person due to artificial intelligence, then justice cannot be achieved, then what will happen to our constitutional goal and judicial ideals?

considering technical intelligence, this technology does not seem appropriate because justice should be available to everyone, it is the best rational social discovery of man. Justice searches for truth, not the majority & truth is not made by an excess of data, truth is only one & lies can be many. Regardless of the discussion, AI may be initially used by those involved in the legal profession to analyze data to reduce the workload of lawyers, but it is unlikely to be used as a final decision right now or shortly. This technology can speed up the work of lawyers, prove to be helpful to them, and fill the gap in their legal assistants/clerks but it seems certain that it cannot replace lawyers.

Reference:-