If artificial intelligence can write reports, analyse spreadsheets, draft emails, answer customer queries and increasingly perform professional tasks that once required years of training, then there is a simple question every worker, employer and politician should be asking: what jobs should humans actually do?

It is an issue that has reached the very top of the technology industry. In a recent essay, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates argued that society may eventually need some forms of "human reserved" work – jobs we deliberately choose to keep in human hands even when machines become capable of doing them.

He compared the idea to nature reserves: places that could be developed but are protected because something valuable would be lost. Mr Gates suggests there are some tasks involving care, empathy and human connection that no robot should replace, regardless of whether it technically could.

For all the discussion about artificial intelligence, much of the debate remains stuck between two familiar positions. One side sees AI as an economic miracle that will unlock productivity, boost growth and eliminate drudgery. The other fears machines replacing millions of workers and hollowing out entire professions. Neither tells the full story.

AI anxiety as job cuts pinned to efficiency improvements

The most pertinent question is not whether AI will take jobs. It almost certainly will, just as previous waves of technological change eliminated occupations ranging from switchboard operators to typists. Nor is the question whether AI will create new jobs. History strongly suggests it will.

The question is what becomes more valuable when machines become capable of doing more of the work that humans currently perform.

The Scottish Government's AI strategy describes artificial intelligence as a technology capable of reshaping economies, industries and public services. It argues that Scotland must harness AI to improve productivity and competitiveness while ensuring people and businesses........

© Herald Scotland