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 <geprope...@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 <mar...@snoutfarm.com > <mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com>> wrote: > > > > How?____ > > > > __ __ > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto: > friam-boun...@redfish.com>> *On Behalf Of *Frank Wimberly > > *Sent:* Monday, March 6, 2023 12:50 PM > > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@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 < > thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@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 <sasm...@swcp.com > <mailto:sasm...@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< > j...@cas-group.net> <mailto:j...@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/ >
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . 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/
