医疗专业人士在最近的一篇《自然医学》（Nature Medicine）文章中引入了「从未习得技能」（never-skilling）的概念，警告人工智慧可能会取代建立独立临床推理所必需的认知努力。这种担忧出现在人工智慧助手于医疗保健领域爆炸性普及之际，像 OpenEvidence 这样的平台已经达到包含超过百分之五十（50%）美国医生的用户群。

目前，「从未习得技能」仍然是一个基于教育理论而非经验确立趋势的概念模型，需要严谨的研究来理解其对医学训练的影响。尽管人工智慧具有增强学习或安全地承担特定能力的潜力，但相关风险的巨大程度迫使机构认真评估其对基础技能发展的潜在后果。

这些担忧延伸到了法律与企业部门，加州大学柏克莱分校法学院（University of California, Berkeley, School of Law）实施了高度限制性的人工智慧政策以确保学生发展必要的认知技能就是明证。在波士顿顾问集团（BCG）强调对员工批判性思考减弱之恐惧的研究支持下，首要的威胁是培养出一代在高风险专业中依赖人工智慧副驾驶而从未获得真正、独立专业知识的专业人士。

Medical professionals have introduced the concept of "never-skilling" in a recent Nature Medicine article, warning that AI could replace the cognitive effort necessary for building independent clinical reasoning. This concern emerges amid the explosive popularity of AI assistants in healthcare, with platforms like OpenEvidence achieving a user base comprising over 50% of United States doctors.

Currently, "never-skilling" remains a conceptual model based on educational theory rather than an empirically established trend, necessitating rigorous study to understand its impact on medical training. Although AI possesses the potential to enhance learning or safely assume specific competencies, the sheer magnitude of the associated risks compels institutions to seriously evaluate the potential ramifications on foundational skill development.

These apprehensions extend into legal and corporate sectors, evidenced by the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law implementing highly restrictive AI policies to ensure students develop requisite cognitive skills. Supported by BCG research highlighting fears of diminished critical thinking among employees, the overarching threat is cultivating a generation of high-stakes professionals who rely on AI copilots without ever acquiring true, independent expertise.