> GPT and LLM are very interesting but say little or nothing to me of new theory of mind, or display inductive logic and reasoning, or even meet the bar for a p

> GPT and LLM are very interesting but say little or nothing to me of new theory of mind, or display inductive logic and reasoning, or even meet the bar for a philosophers cave solution to problems. The simple fact they can generate language so well makes me think... maybe language itself carries more weight than we originally thought. LLMs can get to this point without personal experience and embodiment, it should not have been possible, but here we are. I think philosophers are lagging science now. The RL paradigm of agent-environment-reward based learning seems to me a better one than what we have in philiosophy now. And if you look at how LLMs model language as high dimensional embedding spaces .. this could solve many intractable philosophical problems, like the infinite homunculus regress problem. Relational representations straddle the midpoint between 1st and 3rd person, offering a possible path over the hard problem "gap".