Nowadays people are so sophisticated that we recognize internal biological mechanisms for bias. Optical illusions are a form of bias within our visual system t

Nowadays people are so sophisticated that we recognize internal biological mechanisms for bias. Optical illusions are a form of bias within our visual system that natural selection has optimized for a very biased use case. We see this bias within ourselves and we can extend the knowledge further. If this bias exists in our visual system it must also exist in other systems. Our logic, judgement, emotions and morals all have in built biological biases calibrated for survival in a prehistoric world that is very different for the modern world we live in. Does awareness of these biases eliminate our biases? Can knowledge of our weaknesses allow us to side step the bias and judge something with utter clarity? You assume the answer is yes, and you assume I'm biased so you illustrate to me the concept of an optical illusion and hope that armed with this knowledge I can see my own bias and as a result escape it. The problem is, as you can guess, is that I'm extremely knowledgeable about my biases. I came to my conclusions about chatgpt fully aware and fully mindful of these concepts. So then you can conclude that my bias is highly sophisticated as it is also built on an extremely recursive and sophisticated awareness of bias itself. If such a sophisticated form of bias can exist, then who is to say that you're not the one who is biased? You literally try to frame your own viewpoint as a contrast to the concept of biases within optical illusions. You could be contrasting your own bias with the concept of bias itself. So I am telling you this. You missed something in the latest AI hype cycle. Your bias is so sophisticated it is aware of bias itself and it is blinding you to the fact that this iteration of AI hype was different from the last. When you query chatGPT it can answer with sentences that can only be novelly formulated from true understanding of a topic. Literally, and I tell you this fact as well fully aware of my own biases and the human capacity to "see faces everywhere." So if you claim I'm biased and I claim you're biased? Who is actually biased? Perhaps not the person with actual scientific papers and studies backing his arguments. I have this. Perhaps if I present to you these scientific papers you will become more self aware about the sophistication of your own biases. Maybe you will become more aware about how you revell in your superior knowledge about how humans have "evolved" to see faces everywhere in the same way that they have a tendency to anthropomorphize what you think is essentially a statistical word predictor. You may become more aware of how you apply that knowledge to construct a scaffold of delusion that blinds you to the actuality of what chatGPT is capable of. But you may not want to become aware of it. You may say you don't need to see these scientific papers , or when given those papers you will pour yourself over every detail attempting to find a flaw to prove your argument right. A truly unbiased person will flip his opinion in an instant when given contrary logic and facts. He will abandon years of belief instantly if new logic presents that his beliefs were wrong. Are you that person? Doubt it. Humans don't work this way. Such is the nature of your bias. Or it could be the horrible display of the insane sophistication of my own biases. At this level, both of us have no choice but to follow our biases to the bloody end. Either way my claim is as simple as this. The way chatGPT understands some parts of the world is completely isomorphic to how we colloquially use the word "understanding". At the very least perhaps this reply can help you understand that people who have contrary opinions to you aren't just mindless sheep who fall for classic and cheap human biases. Get off that high horse.