EdenicFaithful
Dark Wizard of Ravenclaw
No bio...
User ID: 78
LLMs have obviously poked some holes in the old argument that intelligence makes us separate from the soulless animals, but ambiguities abound.
For one thing, has the Turing Test really been passed? I haven't used LLMs, so I don't know how they respond to this, but if I simply repeated a question 1000 times would I not know the difference between man and machine? You can probably add in enough deceptions to partially hide from this, but that remains what they are: deceptions. If the machine is conscious, is it aware that it is deceiving me about itself? Or is it actually the human who it pretends to be?
For another, what would happen if an LLM was trained on the complete Library of Babel?
AI is good cause to reevaluate the classical arguments, but people still need to engage with them before any useful shift will happen.
Personally, the ambiguity of the relationship between consciousness and intelligence seems striking to me. On the one hand, we have to admit that at least some significant parts of intelligence can be performed by machines, although it remains possible that the mind and an LLM work very differently to achieve similar outputs.
But on the other hand, there is the curious question of how it is that consciousness is even compatible with thought, if it has no relationship to the thought process. To repurpose Nagel's famous formulation, why is it that there is something that it is like to contemplate a math problem? I'm not entirely willing to abandon the argument that humans have some native form of intelligence that requires a pre-existing consciousness, a form which a mechanism cannot reproduce.
Unfalsifiable philosophical constructs and arbitrary opinion
I could say the same of the theory of emergence, that "somehow" if I throw together enough moving parts consciousness would "evolve," and this in a world that is assumed by scientific fiat to be purely materialistic, ie. inherently without consciousness! We could throw epithets at each other until the sun dies.
IMO, no-one currently has a monopoly on good sense in this matter, and it is best to let people have the conversation which they seem to need to have.
EdenicFaithful
Dark Wizard of Ravenclaw
9d ago
So, what are you reading?
I'm getting interested in Ellul. Also about halfway through The Handmaid's Tale. Can't say it has really moved me yet one way or the other, but it seems to be moving towards something. It vaguely occurs to me that some of the undertone of resentment might be intended for readers like myself, but I can't quite figure out what precisely it is angry about yet. Hopefully it will be something that I can use.
EdenicFaithful
Dark Wizard of Ravenclaw
16d ago
So, what are you reading?
I'm trying to finish Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale. This time around it is resonating, perhaps because the abstract desire for freedom is on my mind.
I want to slightly push back on the anti-Scientology thread below by sharing a basic method of thinking which I derived while reading Hubbard's books, specifically The Way to Happiness. It isn't strictly Scientology as far as I know, just something that I thought of.
In Scientology, there's an idea of exteriorization. The simplest description that I know is "Be 3 feet back of your head." Basically, people are too close to their own problems. If one could see one's body from the outside, one would be able to see himself more clearly and then handle his problems. To quote Hubbard in that book: "It sometimes does not occur to some individuals- as they do not have to spend their days looking at themselves- that they form part of the scenery and appearance of others."
The technique is simple enough that it has probably been talked about or used in other settings, but I've found that it works and I have Hubbard to thank for it.
The Technique
Imagine another person. Give that person some single trait, like a hair colour, to make imagining him or her easier. Put that person in a similar situation to the one you want to think about. Then ask yourself what you think that person should do, or how he should think about it.
I've found that it has a high workability in all kinds of situations involving action, including when I can't stop myself from doing something. It works for planning for the future, or for things like thinking through what you want to say to someone else, or are wondering what you should have done in a past incident, etc.
For example, if you can't stop eating potato chips, give yourself this prompt: There is another person. He has red hair. He has been eating potato chips for the past few hours and can't stop. How should he think about this, or what should he do?
Usually, I think through the issue with clarity, and the behaviour stops, at least for now.
(I am not a Scientologist, or at least have never been audited and probably never will be.)
So, what are you reading?
I've finished The Handmaid's Tale. It's a book I'll have to read again sometime, since there's clearly a lot which I haven't noticed. Can't say it ever came together for me, but maybe that's because I didn't really understand its thrust. The tone throughout was sterile, which was probably intentional, given the motifs of waiting and idleness. The world itself never made a convincing dystopia; it was way too lax in just about everything, and the sense of fear of reprisals or of other people never became more than a literary suggestion. The writing was quite good.
It proved as curious as Atwood, who has not been a predictable simpleton when it comes to politics. On the one hand, it could be read as a screed against the religious right, but the picture is always muddled by something, like the quoting of the communist from each according to his ability. The last chapter muddies the picture even further, making us wonder to what extent this is to be taken as history or myth. As a myth, it may be something of value, something worth a closer look. As a history, it is laced with what seems like old arguments among old activists which seems to limp on eternally, even up to paranoia over viruses.
Going to try some Agatha Christie next, which perennialy seems to be collecting dust on my shelf.
More options
Context Copy link