It is now possible to describe, succinctly, the roles of the educator and the computer. In brief review, the basic definitions of this paper are: entropy is synonymous with disorder; given syntactic context, entropy is information; given partial certainty (about semantics), information becomes doctrine; with some autonomous use, doctrine becomes knowledge; with some morality, knowledge becomes wisdom.
The educator offers doctrine to a student, in the hope that the student will at minimum accept it (``incorporate'' it) as doctrine. Occasionally we educators are witnesses to the miracle of knowledge acquisition: our students can make use of the doctrine on offer, creating knowledge. To the extent that we can teach morality, or at least offer doctrines capable of moral use, we educators can even help to increase our students' wisdom.
The computer works somewhat analogously to an educator, however it is mostly concerned with entropy, information and doctrine. As soon as power is applied, a functional computer will start shuffling entropy in its circuits, generating heat as a waste-product. It will also start shuffling information in what is called a busy-loop, waiting for human input of some doctrine. As soon as a human enters some doctrine into an operating computer, this doctrine can be manipulated and displayed in various ways. Doctrine can also be communicated, under human control, with other computers and thereby with other humans.
To the extent that computers mediate human-human communications, we can say that computers facilitate the creation of knowledge and wisdom. However we cannot say that computers create knowledge or wisdom.
It is not difficult to argue for the collapse of the five-level hierarchy of entropy. For example, we may deny the existence of morality, in which case there is no wisdom, only knowledge. We may further deny the possibility of autonomous action, in which case there is no knowledge, only doctrine. We may consider belief to be unimportant, in which case doctrine is not distinguished from information. We could even lose all syntactic definitions, converting all information to entropy. This loss happens on a small scale, for example, when we allow a culture and its language to die, or more prosaically when a computer disk ``crashes'' and we are unable to recover information from the uninterpretable entropy that remains on the disk. A complete loss of syntax is in fact inescapable, according to Maxwell's theory: our universe is heading inexorably toward a ``heat death'' without entropic differential, devoid of life.
It is thus possible to imagine a world inhabited by humans and computers, without distinctions among wisdom, knowledge, doctrine, and information. In such a world, computers would act as full-fledged educators; indeed, computers would be indistinguishable from people. The distinction, ultimately, is not so much a matter of definition as it is a matter of belief.