I teach what is correct, but the incorrect mainstream understanding is what AI provides. It's the crux of the problem I focus on in my research.

most classes arnt debate classes, they have a course specifically for those if you want to argue a position, yes public speaking and debate courses. trying to challenge a professor every class seems very counterintuitive if you are trying to get a degree , or pass classes. most people who likes to debate like yuo do often wont survive in college very long, or drop out very quickly. they are often conservative or religious nutties,.

So you teach something different from the mainstream - cool. But don’t be surprised when students or AI cite others or take an alternative position.

Not every class is debate. Plenty of courses are simply taught by an expert in their field, and students are graded on how well they learn from that professor's instruction. Is it a perfect system? No. But that's why we have experts. Some classes exist to simply establish a baseline of knowledge among the students. Such classes cannot be continuously derailed by engaging in rigorous debate about topics that experts in the field consider unambiguous and long-settled. Students are free to form their own opinions and whatever conclusions they want, but they need to demonstrate that they have at least learned the material as taught. You can believe the Universe is 6000 years old if you want. You cannot expect your astronomy professor to spend half the class debating with you about it.

A creationist student doesn't have to believe in evolution to get an A in an evolutionary biology class. But they do have to demonstrate mastery or at least competence in the principles of evolutionary biology as taught by their professor. If they want to view the whole course as "a silly exercise in memorizing the lies of evolutionists," well they're free to do so. It's a free country. Believe whatever you want. But that doesn't mean they can just write, "God did it" to every answer on the final and still receive a passing grade.

You're free to believe or reject anything a teacher or professor teaches you. That doesn't mean you get out of learning the lesson entirely.

I'm pretty sure the fucking economist you're replying to is not "teach(ing) something different from the mainstream" that's the whole point of their post.

The whole point is the AI tools are hallucinating* completely incorrect answers and that students trying to use them as study aids and tools to learn with are going to have a lot of fake and wrong information to sort out and good luck to them knowing what is or isn't incorrect or wrong when they're just trying to learn a subject they know nothing about.

The only reason you or I or anyone else knows when AI hallucinates in its output is because we know stuff from our prior knowledge and can catch it that way. If you're ignorant to a subject and trying to learn stuff you're not going to know off hand the AI is lying to you if it sounds convincing enough for a layperson to accept.

*which I kind of hate that term because to the AI there's no difference between truth and hallucination - it's just output as far as the robot is concerned