Comment by nkrisc
2 days ago
Language is an inseparable part of modern humans. It’s likely language evolved as an internal tool for thought and executive function, and externalization of language came afterwards as a means to transmit our thoughts to the minds of other humans.
As such, writing (another form of externalizing our internal language) is a reflection of our essential human qualities.
LLMs can certainly mimic that quite effectively, but they can’t exceed it. I think that’s why LLM writing still never quite hits the mark. It’s the right shape, but it’s missing intent. The words were not chosen to represent real thoughts in someone’s mind.
Even if AI intelligence exceeds humans, it still won’t be human.
> It’s likely language evolved as an internal tool for thought and executive function, and externalization of language came afterwards as a means to transmit our thoughts to the minds of other humans
Isn't this in contradiction to the observations of severely neglected or feral children who having never learned language as a child cannot learn it later in life?
How would any form of inner language evolve in the first place for executive function?
Communication first makes a lot more sense evolutionarily since the ability to communicate more information creates a clear improvement in fitness e.g. being able to signal danger improves survival. It is also more amenable to small improvements in capacity e.g. going from "danger" to "danger wolf" to "danger wolf behind" etc. and we observe these language primitives in other species.
Internal language seems much more likely to be a later development especially given that there are people today who claim they have none / need none and yet still possess the ability to communicate with others and manage their lives normally.
> Isn't this in contradiction to the observations of severely neglected or feral children who having never learned language as a child cannot learn it later in life?
No. Language learning ability does change as the brain matures, but all humans (barring some pathology) possess the ability as infants to learn any human language. They're essentially learning a second vocal language without having ever learned their first. And of course, not all languages are even spoken, such as sign language.
Sure, lots of animals have evolved vocal communication, possible even all from a common ancestor, but none are comparable to human language. There is no limit inherent limit to the information human language can express.
My understanding of the current state of linguistics and evolutionary biology is that communication-first theories are not generally considered likely, though of course it is not settled and likely won't be for a long time (if ever).
> LLMs can certainly mimic that quite effectively, but they can’t exceed it. I think that’s why LLM writing still never quite hits the mark. It’s the right shape, but it’s missing intent. The words were not chosen to represent real thoughts in someone’s mind.
Well yeah. That's because they aren't actually intelligent. They can be useful in the right circumstances despite that, but it's very important to remember that LLMs categorically cannot think, know things, or reason. They are a statistical model, that's it.
The brain is also a statistical model. In fact, the entire universe is. Good luck!