[FRIAM] ChatGPT and William James
Russ Abbott
russ.abbott at gmail.com
Mon Mar 6 18:36:30 EST 2023
Hard to see how you could simulate an infant on the basis of input it's
received. It cries; it smiles; it pees; it poops; it pumps blood; it
breathes, etc. There are many experiments in which one concludes things
about what's going on in an infant's brain by how long it looks at
something.
-- Russ Abbott
Professor Emeritus, Computer Science
California State University, Los Angeles
On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 3:16 PM glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm confused by the emphasis on "data". While I'm tempted to agree with my
> simulation of Frank and say that a human's output is not based solely on
> statistical patterns in the input the human's been trained on, to dissemble
> on the meaning of "data" or "input" or "statistical patterns" is a bridge
> too far.
>
> The compressive encoder, computer, and decoder that is a human brain (&
> the rest of the body) may not be entirely "statistical". But statistics is
> a fairly well-accepted form of behavioral modeling. (Yes, we agent-based
> modelers love to point out how statistical models are not very mechanistic.
> But to deny that you can very closely approximate, even predict, actual
> behavior with some of these models would be foolish.) So, yes, it satisfies
> the letter of the good faith agreement to say that humans output *might* be
> solely based on statistical patterns of its input, even if it violates the
> spirit.
>
> So, if someone insists that a human-mediated map from input to output is
> necessarily, categorically different from a machine-mediated map, the
> burden lies on them to delineate how and why it's different. The primary
> difference might well be related to babies, e.g. some of the "memory" (aka
> training) of past statistical patterns comes in the form of genes passed
> from one's parents. It's unclear to me what the analogs are for something
> like GPT. Presumably there are things like wavelets of method, process,
> intellectual property, or whatever that GPT3 inherited from GPT2, mediated
> by the human-machine replication material that is OpenAI. So, the retort to
> Frank is: "If you live with a baby algorithm, you see it has knowledge that
> can't be based on 'data'." That algorithm came from somewhere ... the
> humans who wrote it, the shoulders they stand on, the hours of debug and
> test cycles the algorithm goes through as its [re]implemented, etc.
>
> On 3/6/23 14:54, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> > If you live with a baby you see that they have knowledge that can't be
> based on "data".
> >
> > ---
> > Frank C. Wimberly
> > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> > Santa Fe, NM 87505
> >
> > 505 670-9918
> > Santa Fe, NM
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 6, 2023, 2:50 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com
> <mailto:marcus at snoutfarm.com>> wrote:
> >
> > How?____
> >
> > __ __
> >
> > *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:
> friam-bounces at redfish.com>> *On Behalf Of *Frank Wimberly
> > *Sent:* Monday, March 6, 2023 12:50 PM
> > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] ChatGPT and William James____
> >
> > __ __
> >
> > >And we humans are different?____
> >
> > __ __
> >
> > In a word, yes.____
> >
> > ---
> > Frank C. Wimberly
> > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> > Santa Fe, NM 87505
> >
> > 505 670-9918
> > Santa Fe, NM____
> >
> > __ __
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 6, 2023, 12:14 PM Nicholas Thompson <
> thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com>> wrote:____
> >
> > */However, it's important to remember that there are also
> important differences between a large language model and human
> consciousness. While a large language model can generate text that may seem
> to flow like a stream of consciousness, it does not have the same kind of
> subjective experience that humans do, and its output is based solely on
> statistical patterns in the input it has been trained on./*____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > And we humans are different? ____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 11:51 AM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com
> <mailto:sasmyth at swcp.com>> wrote:____
> >
> > Also second EricS's appreciation for having someone else(s)
> maintain a coherent conversation for the myriad ideas that it allows me to
> explore without being central to the maintenance of the thread. I realize
> this may be almost pure tangent to others, so I rarely expect anyone to
> take my bait unless it is to correct any egregious mis-attributions or
> think-utational fallacies.____
> >
> > Starting with Glen's assertion/suggestion/assumption that
> there is not mind-stuff and body stuff, just body stuff: I appeal to the
> general abstraction of Emergence and use Russell Standish's example in his
> "Theory of Nothing <
> https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/967936.Theory_Of_Nothing?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=GgXJ0ISQei&rank=1>"
> that a water molecule is not wet... wetness is a property of aggregates of
> water molecules. I would jump a dozen layers of emergent-bootstrapping
> from there to assert that "mind stuff", if it ever makes sense, is an
> emergent property of "body stuff". But by analogy would not want to say
> that wetness (and other properties of bulk water molecules) is not strictly
> "molecular dynamics stuff". And even if one did that, the
> recursion/reduction-ad-absurdum requires that one acknowledge/notice/invoke
> that the properties of any molecule is "emergent" from the elementary
> particles from which it might be composed. ____
> >
> > I think we all believe in free-electrons, protons,
> neutrons but also recognize that *most* of our observed universe is shaped
> not by *those properties* (much less the properties of quarks and gluons or
> 10d loops of abstract things we call strings) but rather by the properties
> (once again, not of molecular dynamics or even chemical reactions) but
> biological functions, and socio-economic-political functions as well.
> I *am* however, sensitive to the idea that where and how we draw the line
> between mind/body stuff can be important in any given argument, and that
> sometimes dropping that line altogether may be useful?____
> >
> > The above riff on Mind-Stuff v Body-Stuff is really an intro
> into thoughts about how syntax and semantics might bootstrap
> sequentially. It feels to me that the syntax of one level of abstraction
> yields an *emergent semantics* which in turn becomes the *syntax* of the
> next "level". I do acknowledge that Glen has made some arguments (and
> references) that are against the very abstraction of "levels" and that may
> well be the hole in everything I'm unrolling here, but for the moment, I
> feel I have a clear picture of a POSET of syntax/semantics, if not a full
> Hierarchy... ____
> >
> > This also backs me into the Platonic ideations with all the
> charms and criticisms already dancing as virtual (ideational) particles
> around that. I will go back to reading A Theory of Nothing <
> https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/967936.Theory_Of_Nothing?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=GgXJ0ISQei&rank=1>...
> and try to keep my offerings here under 10 pages each...____
> >
> > On 3/4/23 4:32 AM, Santafe wrote:____
> >
> > It’s helpful to have a conversation being maintained by
> somebod(ies) else, to which one can be a bystander without the distraction
> of coming up with contributions to it. Things can suggest themselves that
> get pushed out of awareness when one is carrying the discourse and figuring
> out what to do next within it.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > In reading the below, about the time I got to the
> lines:____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > The mind-body problem is the philosophical question
> of how the mind and body are related. One of the main issues is how mental
> processes such as thoughts, emotions, and consciousness are related to
> physical processes in the brain and body.____
> >
> > I was prompted with a term to refer to these
> mental/physical things.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > First, my sense of all this is one of witnessing
> structures in conversation. Maybe I am more primed to that because with
> ChatGPT as the topic, one fronts awareness of conversation as somewhat
> free-floating from its semantic ground. As tokens in conversation, it is
> perfectly sensible to say that (thoughts, emotions, consciousness) are in a
> category Mental, while (weakness, hunger, itching) go into a category
> Physical. Not only is it okay to say they fit tolerably into “categories”
> (or “classes”); the reason they do so is that they are connected by all
> sorts of linguistic usage relations. The relations probably in no small
> part bring about the stability of the categorical sense of the terms.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > But what word do we then use to refer to such classes in
> speech? I would use the word “registers”. The Mental is a register of
> conversation about events, and the Physical is another register.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Jochen’s email below has ChatGPT saying James referred
> to these as “aspects” of various bodily or embodied events. Sometimes I’m
> okay with a word like “aspects”, but it invites essentialist thinking.
> That the event is like a computer-language object, which has properties
> (the aspects) that define its interface, and not only are the properties
> ascribable to the object, but their status as defined elements of the
> interface is also a real-thing, and not merely a frame-dependent convenient
> compression. But using “aspects” thoughtlessly does two things: it makes
> essentialism a habit, which I think will often be invalid, and it neglects
> the communications role that “register” highlights.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > I would attach this to Glen’s fairly terse
> characterization that there is no mind-stuff contrasted with body-stuff,
> but just one kind of stuff, which if we have to choose a word for it we can
> call body-stuff. From a perspective of aspects, the terse version could be
> closer to or further from a more fine-grained description, depending on
> whether the essentialist view is more or less appropriate for one or
> another phemonenon we want to discuss. But I think the idea that speech
> provides us certain conventional registers to bound discussions of
> phenomena, and that these too may be better- or worse-fit to the
> organization of the phenomena themselves, is another fair fine-graining of
> the terse characterization, running somewhat parallel to the aspects or
> essences fine-graining (though, as always, connected to it through a kind
> of message-passing and filtering for structural agreement).____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Eric____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > On Feb 28, 2023, at 5:23 PM, Jochen Fromm<
> jofr at cas-group.net> <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > I enjoy talking with ChatGPT about famous
> scientists, thinkers, writers and philosophers. Because it is trained on
> vast amounts of data it knows them all: Pascal, Cervantes, Dante, Hugo,
> Goethe, Leibniz, Newton, Humboldt, Shakespeare,... It can summarize almost
> any book which is remarkable. Today I have asked it about William James and
> Anil Seth____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: You certainly have heard of William James, one
> of the fathers of Psychology?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: Yes, I'm familiar with William James. He
> was an American philosopher and psychologist who is often referred to as
> the "father of American psychology." He made significant contributions to
> the development of psychology as a scientific discipline, and his ideas and
> writings continue to influence psychology and related fields to this
> day.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Some of James' most influential contributions to
> psychology include his theory of functionalism, which emphasized the study
> of the purpose and function of behavior and mental processes, rather than
> their underlying structures; his work on consciousness, which he famously
> described as a "stream" of continuously changing thoughts and perceptions;
> and his exploration of the relationship between the mind and the body,
> which he called the "mind-body problem."____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > James also wrote extensively on a wide range of
> topics, including religion, philosophy, and human nature. His most famous
> book, "The Principles of Psychology," was published in 1890 and is still
> considered a classic in the field.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: Can you summarize his book "The Principles of
> Psychology"?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: Certainly! "The Principles of Psychology"
> is a comprehensive and influential textbook that William James published in
> 1890. It aimed to provide a broad overview of the field of psychology at
> the time, covering topics such as perception, emotion, thought,
> consciousness, and the nature of the self.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > The book is organized into two main sections. The
> first section focuses on the lower-level processes of sensation and
> perception, including topics such as attention, memory, and learning. The
> second section focuses on higher-level mental processes, such as reasoning,
> judgment, and emotion.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Throughout the book, James emphasized the importance
> of studying mental processes in their natural context and stressed the need
> for psychology to be closely linked to biology and other natural sciences.
> He also developed the theory of functionalism, which argued that the
> purpose and function of mental processes are more important to
> understanding them than their underlying structures.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Overall, "The Principles of Psychology" was a
> landmark work that helped establish psychology as a distinct scientific
> discipline and influenced generations of psychologists and other
> scientists.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: William James said: "Thoughts themselves are the
> thinkers". What does he mean?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: When William James said "thoughts
> themselves are the thinkers," he was expressing his belief in what is often
> called the "stream of consciousness" view of the mind. James believed that
> the mind is not a fixed entity or substance, but rather a constantly
> changing stream of thoughts, feelings, and sensations.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > According to James, our thoughts are not the
> products of a separate entity or "thinker" within us, but rather they are
> the result of the ongoing activity of the mind itself. In other words, the
> mind is not a passive receptacle for thoughts that are generated elsewhere,
> but an active process that generates thoughts and experiences as it goes
> along.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > This view is closely related to James' broader
> philosophy of pragmatism, which emphasized the importance of understanding
> things in terms of their practical implications and effects. For James, the
> idea that thoughts themselves are the thinkers was not just a theoretical
> claim about the nature of the mind, but a practical way of understanding
> how we can change and shape our own thoughts and experiences. By
> understanding the workings of our own minds, James believed, we can take an
> active role in shaping our own lives and achieving our goals.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: He also coined the term "stream of
> consciousness" which suggests that consciousness flows like a river. What
> does he want to say by using this metaphor?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: When William James coined the term "stream
> of consciousness," he was using a metaphor to describe his view of the mind
> as a constantly flowing and changing stream of thoughts, feelings, and
> sensations.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > The metaphor of a stream suggests that consciousness
> is not a static or fixed entity, but rather a dynamic and fluid process
> that is always in motion. The stream of consciousness is always moving
> forward, and we can never step into the same stream twice. Similarly, the
> content of our consciousness is always changing, as new thoughts, feelings,
> and sensations arise and fall away.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > By using the metaphor of a stream, James was also
> highlighting the interconnectedness of our thoughts and experiences. Just
> as a river is made up of many different streams and tributaries, our
> consciousness is made up of many different thoughts and experiences that
> are constantly interacting and influencing each other.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Overall, the metaphor of the stream of consciousness
> captures the dynamic and ever-changing nature of our mental lives, and
> highlights the importance of understanding the ongoing flow of thoughts and
> experiences that make up our conscious experience.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: A constantly flowing stream of thoughts is
> similar to what a large language model is perceiving and producing, isn't
> it?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: Yes, the metaphor of the stream of
> consciousness can be similar to how a large language model like me
> perceives and produces language. Just as consciousness is often described
> as a constantly flowing stream of thoughts and experiences, a large
> language model like me is constantly processing and generating language in
> response to the input it receives.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Like the stream of consciousness, a large language
> model is always in motion, constantly analyzing and generating language
> based on the patterns and structures it has learned from the vast amounts
> of text it has been trained on. And just as consciousness is made up of
> many different thoughts and experiences that are interconnected and
> constantly interacting, a large language model's output is made up of many
> different words and phrases that are generated in response to each
> other.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > However, it's important to note that there are also
> important differences between a large language model and the human mind.
> While a large language model can generate language that may seem to flow
> like a stream of consciousness, it does not have the same kind of
> subjective experience that humans do. A large language model does not have
> feelings, emotions, or a sense of self, and its output is based solely on
> statistical patterns in the input it has been trained on.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: What is James' solution to the mind-body
> problem?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: William James was a philosopher and
> psychologist who made important contributions to the field of psychology
> and philosophy of mind, including his exploration of the mind-body
> problem.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > The mind-body problem is the philosophical question
> of how the mind and body are related. One of the main issues is how mental
> processes such as thoughts, emotions, and consciousness are related to
> physical processes in the brain and body.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > James approached the mind-body problem from a
> pragmatic perspective, emphasizing the practical consequences of different
> ways of thinking about the problem. He proposed what is known as a "radical
> empiricist" approach, which suggested that the mind and body are not
> separate entities, but rather different aspects of a single reality that is
> constantly in flux.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > According to James, the mind and body are both part
> of the same universe, and they are both subject to the same laws of nature.
> Mental events are not caused by physical events in the brain, nor are
> physical events caused by mental events. Instead, James argued that the
> mind and body are two aspects of a larger, more complex reality that cannot
> be fully understood by examining either one in isolation.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > In other words, James rejected the traditional
> mind-body dualism that posits a sharp distinction between mind and matter,
> and instead proposed a more holistic view that recognizes the deep
> interdependence of the mind and body. While James' solution to the
> mind-body problem remains controversial, his ideas continue to influence
> contemporary debates in philosophy and psycholoy.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: Let us return to the idea of thoughts themselves
> as the thinkers. This implies that one thought triggers another and is
> replaced by it, just like water in a stream is replaced by other water,
> which in turn is replaced too, and so on and so forth. No thought can
> remain permanently, only return like a wave to the shore. Is this what
> James means by a stream of consciousness?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: Yes, you are correct. James' idea that
> "thoughts themselves are the thinkers" is closely related to his concept of
> the "stream of consciousness." According to James, the mind is not a fixed
> entity or substance, but rather a constantly changing stream of thoughts,
> feelings, and sensations. This stream of consciousness is always flowing
> and evolving, with one thought leading to another and so on.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Just as water in a stream is replaced by other
> water, which is in turn replaced by more water, the content of our
> consciousness is also constantly changing, with one thought or experience
> giving rise to the next. And just as no water in a stream can remain in one
> place permanently, no thought can remain permanently in the stream of
> consciousness. Thoughts and experiences may return or be remembered, but
> they are always changing in relation to the ongoing flow of the stream of
> consciousness.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Overall, James' metaphor of the stream of
> consciousness captures the dynamic and ever-changing nature of our mental
> lives, highlighting the ongoing flow of thoughts and experiences that make
> up our conscious experience.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: Does this idea of William James feel familiar to
> you as a large language model?____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: As a large language model, I do not have
> the same kind of subjective experience as humans do, so I don't experience
> a stream of consciousness in the same way that humans do. However, the
> concept of a stream of consciousness does have some relevance to how I
> operate.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Like the stream of consciousness, the input and
> output of a large language model are constantly changing and evolving, with
> one word or phrase leading to another. When generating text, a large
> language model takes into account the context of the input it has received,
> along with the patterns and structures it has learned from the massive
> amounts of text it has been trained on. This can lead to output that has a
> flowing, interconnected quality, similar to the way thoughts and
> experiences flow in a stream of consciousness.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > However, it's important to remember that there are
> also important differences between a large language model and human
> consciousness. While a large language model can generate text that may seem
> to flow like a stream of consciousness, it does not have the same kind of
> subjective experience that humans do, and its output is based solely on
> statistical patterns in the input it has been trained on.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > Me: That's true. It is still fascinating.____
> >
> > ____
> >
> > ChatGPT: Yes, it is certainly fascinating how the
> concept of a stream of consciousness can be applied to different domains
> and systems, including the functioning of large language models. The idea
> of a constantly flowing and evolving stream of thoughts and experiences is
> a rich metaphor that has many different applications and implications. It
> has inspired a great deal of philosophical and psychological inquiry over
> the years, and continues to be an important area of investigation in
> contemporary research.____
> >
>
> --
> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20230306/251c2aab/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list