3 ms·
My point is that we know very little about the sort of "thought" that we are capable of either. I agree that LLMs cannot do what we typical refer to as "thought
by PaulDavisThe1st 10mo ago
My point is that we know very little about the sort of "thought" that we are capable of either. I agree that LLMs cannot do what we typical refer to as "thought", but I thnk it is possible that we do a LOT less of that than we think when we are "thinking" (or more precisely, having the experience of thinking).
- viccis 10mo agoHow does this worldview reconcile the fact that thought demonstrably exists independent of either language or vision/audio sense?
- PaulDavisThe1st 10mo agoI don't see a need to reconcile them.
- viccis 10mo agoWhich is why it's incoherent!
- PaulDavisThe1st 10mo agoI'm not clear that it has to be coherent at this point in the history of our understanding of cognition. We barely know what we're even talking about most of the time ...