[ExI] GPT-4 on its inability to solve the symbol grounding problem

Sat Apr 15 02:22:49 UTC 2023

Hi Giovani,
Yes, I agree.
And wow, what a cute grandson!!!

On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 3:33 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> That's really incredible! Thanks for sharing these. I'm just trying to
> imagine a human who's never seen anything do as good a job..  It requires
> great talent and understanding, perhaps even some form of visual
> imagination.
>
> Jason
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023, 6:12 AM Giovanni Santostasi via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> A man holding an apple and a pear, in front of a table with a bowl and a
>> plate. I also asked to add eyes and a mouth and blond hair.
>> Pretty good job for a blind AI.
>> Giovanni
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 9:33 PM Giovanni Santostasi <
>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *So are you claiming that you can communicate to someone, (say a
>>> congenitally blind person that has never experienced your redness) what a
>>> colorness property like redness is like, with only abstract text?  What do
>>> you think the term "ineffable" means?*Giovanni: Try to describe the
>>> experience of seeing red to a person that is congenitally blind.
>>> GPT-4:
>>> Describing the experience of seeing red to a person who is congenitally
>>> blind can be challenging, as they have never had the ability to perceive
>>> colors. However, we can attempt to convey the concept of red by relating it
>>> to other senses and emotions.
>>>
>>> Red is a warm color, often associated with strong emotions and
>>> sensations. Imagine the feeling of warmth you experience when you step out
>>> into the sun on a hot day, or the heat you feel when you hold a warm mug of
>>> tea or coffee. Red can be related to that sensation of warmth.
>>>
>>> In terms of emotions, red is often associated with passion, love, and
>>> intensity. Think about the feeling of excitement when you receive a gift or
>>> a surprise, the quickened heartbeat when you are in a thrilling situation,
>>> or the rush of emotions when you are with someone you love. Red can evoke
>>> these strong feelings and emotions.
>>>
>>> Additionally, red is also connected to the sense of taste. Consider the
>>> taste of a ripe, juicy strawberry or a spicy chili pepper. The flavors can
>>> range from sweet to hot and can evoke a sense of energy and stimulation.
>>> This connection to taste can help provide a sensory association with the
>>> color red.
>>>
>>> While it is impossible to fully convey the visual experience of seeing
>>> red to a congenitally blind person, relating the color to sensations,
>>> emotions, and tastes can help provide a contextual understanding of what
>>> red represents in our experiences.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 7:24 PM Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Giovanni,
>>>> So are you claiming that you can communicate to someone, (say a
>>>> congenitally blind person that has never experienced your redness) what a
>>>> colorness property like redness is like, with only abstract text?  What do
>>>> you think the term "ineffable" means?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 9:45 PM Giovanni Santostasi <
>>>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Brent,
>>>>> What is your evidence for such statements? Is there an experiment, not
>>>>> a thought experiment that follows your made-up rules (like the color
>>>>> converter that has serious problems from a logical and scientific point of
>>>>> view that I don't want to discuss here). Can you find a paper, a real
>>>>> experiment in neuroscience that supports this statement:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *But there is no way you can communicate to someone what redness is
>>>>> like, with text alone.*
>>>>> What do you mean here by communicate? Is it my analogy about touching
>>>>> a blue line on a map and saying the blue line is not wet?
>>>>> Is this what you really mean?
>>>>> In other words, do you mean if I describe to you what happens in my
>>>>> brain or any other brain what sequences of events, what relationships
>>>>> between neurons, what neural code represents my perception of red, you are
>>>>> not going to see red in your head?
>>>>>
>>>>> If that is what you mean, do you realize how absurd of an idea this
>>>>> is?
>>>>>  1) It is not what science is about, it is not supposed to make you
>>>>> feel red, it is supposed to make you understand what is fundamental about
>>>>> this phenomenon of red, science's job is to provide simplification,
>>>>> abstractions, maps, and models. This simplification is not a BUG but a
>>>>> FEATURE. It is what gives power to science.
>>>>> 2) The usefulness of making a model is that you can carry the map in
>>>>> your pocket, sort of speak, and bring it with you in another location and
>>>>> communicate everything essential (for whatever purpose) to somebody else
>>>>> that has never been in that place. Yes, they are not to experience the
>>>>> landscape as if they were there but that is not the point at all.
>>>>> If we use the analogy of the blueprint instead of a map I can recreate
>>>>> a car or a building using the blueprint and if somebody comes by and points
>>>>> to the blueprint and says "but this engine doesn't move" you will think
>>>>> that person is crazy and mentally impaired. If you want to ride the car,
>>>>> let me build it from the blueprint and then you can do that.
>>>>>
>>>>> So your statement above is both crazy and obvious at the same time.
>>>>> Science is not in the business of making you feel the original thing
>>>>> that is described. It is in the opposite business, it tries to abstract the
>>>>> essential parts, which are mostly relational parts, and how things are
>>>>> related to each other. This is also how science can abstract away even from
>>>>> the original form of something. Think about how we abstracted away the
>>>>> meaning of flight from birds. It is not about the feathers, and the
>>>>> flapping wings but the principle of aerodynamics. You can create a flying
>>>>> machine by using these principles that are related but not a 1 to 1
>>>>> relationship with how birds solved the problem of aerodynamics.
>>>>> By the way, this is also a natural way. Think about how many living
>>>>> beings rediscovered in evolution sight, camouflage, hydrodynamics,
>>>>> photosynthesis. Think about DNA.
>>>>> Yes, think about DNA. Does DNA make you see my redness? No, but my
>>>>> redness was somehow contained in the DNA as code. You can build the DNA to
>>>>> build a Giovanni that then will experience red. But if you understand where
>>>>> in the DNA the redness is represented, then you can use that information to
>>>>> understand everything there is to understand about Giovanni's redness from
>>>>> a scientific point of view.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think maybe in writing this down I may understand an issue that
>>>>> could rise to some of your thinking. That is the idea of computational
>>>>> irreducibility that is an idea that Wolfram developed. All the phenomena,
>>>>> in reality, are a sort of code but you cannot predict what the result of
>>>>> the code is in advance in some instances. You need to run the code to know
>>>>> what the results are. Maybe this is something that you have in mind when
>>>>> you talk about this business of redness, I have the suspicions that you are
>>>>> thinking something like that but you are expressing it in a way that is not
>>>>> easy to understand or causes a lot of confusion. So it is still code if you
>>>>> do but you raise an important and relevant issue about computation that
>>>>> some of them are so complex that they are irreducible. I'm ok with qualia
>>>>> being irreducible computation. Maybe is the only scientific meaningful way
>>>>> to think about them.
>>>>> Here a summary of this issue by Wolfram himself:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2021/09/charting-a-course-for-complexity-metamodeling-ruliology-and-more/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 6:37 PM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
>>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Jason,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 8:07 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
>>>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thus the simulation, like the isomorphic graph, by preserving all
>>>>>>> the same relationships recovers all the same properties. If the glutamate
>>>>>>> molecule possesses redness, then the perfect simulation of glutamate will
>>>>>>> possess redness too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ALL of our objective observations of physics can be fully described
>>>>>> with abstract text.
>>>>>> All of that which you could simulate, can also be described with
>>>>>> abstract text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But there is no way you can communicate to someone what redness is
>>>>>> like, with text alone.
>>>>>> You MUST have pictures, to produce the subjective experience, before
>>>>>> someone can know what redness is like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There must be certain stuff in the brain which can be computationally
>>>>>> bound, which produces something beyond, what can be described via abstract
>>>>>> text.
>>>>>> You can abstractly describe all of it, you can objectively observe
>>>>>> all of it with our senses, and you can abstractly simulate all of that.
>>>>>> But until it is physically computationally bound with the rest of our
>>>>>> consciousness, you can't know the true quality you are only abstractly
>>>>>> describing and simulating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In other words, like abstract text can't communicate the nature of
>>>>>> qualities.
>>>>>> An abstract simulation also, can't produce anything more than
>>>>>> abstract text can describe.
>>>>>> At least, that is what I predict.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> extropy-chat mailing list
>>>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>>>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230414/c05128cf/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 21913 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230414/c05128cf/attachment.png>