I half-disagree: this is exactly the kind of analytic truth humans are usually interested in. "Truth" as perceived by humans is based on a massive system of pre

I half-disagree: this is exactly the kind of analytic truth humans are usually interested in. "Truth" as perceived by humans is based on a massive system of prefiltering, narrowing, preprocessing and situational awareness. A drop of water falls on your hand. Is it raining? Depends. Are you painting a watercolor picture outside? Then probably yes. Or are you going to the store? Then probably no. So truth is inseparable in practice from usecase. Is a whale a fish? I don't know, are you a geneticist or a poet? It's all mood and usecase. I'm not convinced there's any difference in kind between the LLM's speaker-selection and a human's choice of research field. That is to say, it's not that I think you're wrong, it's that there is no other pursuit of truth than what you describe. If anything, the LLM's pursuit of next-token prediction is unusually honest for a truth-seeker.