  Real-life conjectures do not come with instructions saying whether they they
should be proven or, instead, refuted. Yet, as we now know, in either case the
final argument produced had better be not just convincing but actually
verifiable in as much detail as our need for eliminating risk might require.
For those who do not happen to have direct access to the realm of mathematical
truths, the modern field of formalized mathematics has quite a few lessons to
contribute, and one might pay heed to what it has to say, for instance, about:
the importance of employing proof strategies; the fine control of automation in
unraveling the structure of a certain proof object; reasoning forward from the
givens and backward from the goals, in developing proof scripts; knowing when
and how definitions and identities apply in a helpful way, and when they do not
apply; seeing proofs [and refutations] as dynamical objects, not reflected by
the static derivation trees that Proof Theory wants them to be. I believe that
the great challenge for teachers and learners resides currently less on the
availability of suitable generic tools than in combining them wisely in view of
their preferred education paradigms and introducing them in a way that best
fits their specific aims, possibly with the help of intelligent online
interactive tutoring systems. As a proof of concept, a computerized proof
assistant that makes use of several successful tools already freely available
on the market and that takes into account some of the above findings about
teaching and learning Logic is hereby introduced. To fully account for our
informed intuitions on the subject it would seem that a little bit extra
technology would still be inviting, but no major breakthrough is really needed:
We are talking about tools that are already within our reach to develop, as the
fruits of collaborative effort.
