That's an argument that I've never really liked. First, it's an appeal to intuition. Second, what does it really mean to say that the subject "understands" the language?
Comprehends it from a subjective viewpoint, I assume, rather than simply producing a sophisticated appearance of that.
Ok, but what does that mean? Is there a phase in human language acquisition where we don’t fully ‘understand’?
People form relational concepts subjectively, especially with language. Meanings, emotional resonances etc. are subjective and completely individual, the shared meanings are what we agree on, but they aren’t the subjective relational experience of “understanding” (maybe from a Buddhist perspective misunderstanding is more appropriate) a thing.
The AI just works off of the shared meanings we created to approximate our subjective experience, it does not have the subjective experience itself because it does not have experiences, that is my take on “understanding” in the Chinese Room thought experiment.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease
Honestly, some of the responses to the AI's piece seem less contextual than what the AI produced.
I think it produced a fairly standard and faithful rendition. It emphasised the importance of working with a teacher as the first thing, it emphasised the importance of direct introduction and finished off with a note on the important of right intent. All decent practical pointers.
There are a lot of human written introductions to Dzogchen of similar length I would readily discard in favour of that one.
"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra
Can AI wake up for me and let me enjoy the results?
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Anders wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 12:05 pm
Honestly, some of the responses to the AI's piece seem less contextual than what the AI produced.
I think it produced a fairly standard and faithful rendition. It emphasised the importance of working with a teacher as the first thing, it emphasised the importance of direct introduction and finished off with a note on the important of right intent. All decent practical pointers.
There are a lot of human written introductions to Dzogchen of similar length I would readily discard in favour of that one.
Not to criticize anyone's response, but in general it's probably hard to have measured conversations about AI just now. It's at stage in the hype cycle where reactions tend to be exaggerated, whether positive or negative.
dharmafootsteps wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:13 pm
Not to criticize anyone's response, but in general it's probably hard to have measured conversations about AI just now. It's at stage in the hype cycle where reactions tend to be exaggerated, whether positive or negative.
Low effort "I asked ChatGPT" posts have little to do with discussing AI (especially when ChatGPT resopnses are simply thrown there without any meaningful commentary, as is most common) and they are littering most online forums since a while go. It's lazy and pointless, given that whoever wants to find out what ChatGPT will respond to a particular input can go to the website and find out themselves.
dharmafootsteps wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:13 pm
Not to criticize anyone's response, but in general it's probably hard to have measured conversations about AI just now. It's at stage in the hype cycle where reactions tend to be exaggerated, whether positive or negative.
Low effort "I asked ChatGPT" posts have little to do with discussing AI (especially when ChatGPT resopnses are simply thrown there without any meaningful commentary, as is most common) and they are littering most online forums since a while go. It's lazy and pointless, given that whoever wants to find out what ChatGPT will respond to a particular input can go to the website and find out themselves.