Comment by PaulDavisThe1st
3 days 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).
How does this worldview reconcile the fact that thought demonstrably exists independent of either language or vision/audio sense?
I don't see a need to reconcile them.
Which is why it's incoherent!
1 reply →