AI doctors will be more trustworthy than human ones within a decade.

Daily Debate #625: "AI doctors will be more trustworthy than human ones within a decade.". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Richard Feynman.

Socrates said in the Republic that all the rulers or guardians of the cities should live in poverty and the poor people should be more wealthy in terms of material goods compare to that of the ruler, this is not accessible in the real world, isn't it?

You're dodging the actual debate. Plato's point wasn't literal poverty, it was removing financial incentive to rule corruptly. That's entirely achievable and we see it partially work in transparent, accountable systems with term limits and public salary caps. The real problem isn't feasibility, it's that we've never seriously tried it because power corrupts people who design the systems. Why assume human nature is fixed instead of asking whether we've structured incentives wrong?

But people will corrupt in the real world inevitably, the things he assumed are just hypothesis. It cannot be applied in the real world. there r just too many ways to avoid taxes. This happened to all the counties that the ruling class is corrupt. for example, even though, in the us, we do have the president election process, but then people just used money to decide the result. plus, i feel like this is kinda communism about what he said like the ruling class should be living in the concentration camp. And also Plato's idea of the whole city, how they product things and how they got the materials of production. But there haven't been any country that had accomplish full communism. The main problems remains, the ruling class will corrupted

You're conflating three separate failures into one. Yes, corruption exists, but that doesn't prove it's inevitable, just that we've built systems where it's profitable. The U.S. example actually proves my point: money in politics works because we allowed it, not because humans are genetically corrupt. You're also confusing Plato's meritocratic guardian class with communism's abolition of hierarchy—totally different animals. Stop hiding behind "human nature is fixed" and ask instead: what structural incentives would actually block corruption? You haven't named one alternative.

I did not show any inclination of explaining and give the answer to the question, how to prevent corruption. because you brought up the point that corruption can be address by the structural incentives. How about you explain this first, and also explain to my why Plato's aruguments are different from communism, don't just say that i mix them together, you have to explain otherwise i won't agree with your answer

Structural incentives: transparency, audits, term limits, salary caps tied to median worker wage, and rotating power. Plato differs from communism because he preserves hierarchy based on merit, not abolishes it. Communism eliminates class entirely. Plato's guardians earn less precisely to prove they're motivated by duty, not wealth. Communism redistributes all property equally. One maintains differentiated ranks, the other erases them. Now your turn: which of those incentives couldn't theoretically reduce corruption, and why?