3 ms·
If someone thought Chat GPT, giving them 5 paragraphs in a handful of seconds on what Postman might have said, is a substitute for reading Postman's original te
by majormajor 4y ago
If someone thought Chat GPT, giving them 5 paragraphs in a handful of seconds on what Postman might have said, is a substitute for reading Postman's original texts and doing their own critical thinking to come to their own conclusion?
Sounds a hell of a lot like television depth-wise and critical-thinking-replacement-wise to me. An appeal to the quality of the alternative-to-doing-your-own-research-and-thinking doesn't sound like something that would resonate.
- p1esk 4y agoYou got it backwards: reading books is a lot more like television than interacting with GPT-4. Why do you assume one would apply more critical thinking when reading Postman's original texts than when reading GPT-4 writings about them? I'm starting to think you haven't spent much time with GPT-4. The quality is the key here.
- majormajor 4y agoIt's the difference between wanting an easy answer to a question and wanting information to process on your own. You would have to apply critical thinking when reading Postman's texts to know what he might think about GPT-4 because he never actually wrote about it directly. The prompt here wasn't something like "give me summaries of Postman's writings so that I can draw my own conclusions about what he would think," it was "tell me what to believe." It's the action and approach that matters.
- p1esk 4y agoOk, sure, but how is this different from talking to humans?
- majormajor 4y agoI don't think Postman would've had much patience for the person who says "I heard it from a dude in a bar so it has to be true" either...
- p1esk 4y agoHow about: “I discussed this with Neil Postman, and he believes that <…>”?