I don't think gpt is capable of figuring out something you've failed to crack in your time here. It's still just a chatbot, after all.

Seed text: Explain why an atheist should not study Swedenborg.

ChatGPT response:

While individuals have the freedom to pursue any subject of study they choose, here are a few reasons why an atheist may not find studying Emanuel Swedenborg's work particularly appealing:

1. Religious Foundation: Swedenborg's writings are deeply rooted in his religious beliefs and mystical experiences. His works are centered around the existence of a spiritual realm, interactions with angels and spirits, and the divine origin of his insights. As an atheist, one may find little relevance or interest in studying materials that are grounded in religious assumptions and supernatural claims that lack empirical evidence.

2. Lack of Empirical Support: Swedenborg's claims about the spiritual world and his encounters with celestial beings are not based on verifiable evidence or scientific observation. For atheists who prioritize evidence-based reasoning and critical thinking, the lack of empirical support for Swedenborg's assertions may make his work less compelling or worthy of serious study.

3. Alternative Perspectives: There are numerous philosophical, psychological, and scientific perspectives that offer valuable insights into the human experience, ethics, and the search for meaning. Atheists may find more relevance and intellectual stimulation by exploring ideas and theories that align with evidence-based methodologies and rational inquiry, rather than delving into the metaphysical claims and mystical experiences put forth by Swedenborg.

4. Time and Focus: Every individual has limited time and attention to devote to their intellectual pursuits. Atheists may choose to focus on topics and disciplines that align more closely with their interests, values, and worldview. Considering the vast array of subjects available for exploration, studying Swedenborg's religious writings may not be a priority for an atheist seeking to expand their knowledge in areas that align more closely with their own perspective.

5. Critique of Religion: Some atheists actively engage in critical analysis and critique of religious beliefs, practices, and ideologies. Swedenborg's work, being deeply intertwined with his religious convictions, may not offer much material for constructive critique or intellectual challenge from an atheist perspective.

Ultimately, the decision whether or not to study Swedenborg or any particular subject is a personal one, and individuals may have their own unique motivations and interests. Atheists, like anyone else, are free to explore a wide range of topics and should choose areas of study that resonate with their intellectual curiosity and contribute to their personal growth and understanding of the world.

I've just started using it now and all I can say is WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm gonna be so addicted to using this thing. It's already helping me with some database design questions I was having, and I've been interested in learning German and asked it to summarise the pronunciation of various different things, then group them in a table, then reformat the table to look more like a matrix.... it's just absolutely incredible how it responds to feedback. I was looking forward to going through the process of collating all of that but this thing did it for me effortlessly. It's just absolutely awesome!

(May 11, 2023 at 4:13 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Seed text: Explain why an atheist should not study Swedenborg.

ChatGPT response:

While individuals have the freedom to pursue any subject of study they choose, here are a few reasons why an atheist may not find studying Emanuel Swedenborg's work particularly appealing:

1. Religious Foundation: Swedenborg's writings are deeply rooted in his religious beliefs and mystical experiences. His works are centered around the existence of a spiritual realm, interactions with angels and spirits, and the divine origin of his insights. As an atheist, one may find little relevance or interest in studying materials that are grounded in religious assumptions and supernatural claims that lack empirical evidence.

2. Lack of Empirical Support: Swedenborg's claims about the spiritual world and his encounters with celestial beings are not based on verifiable evidence or scientific observation. For atheists who prioritize evidence-based reasoning and critical thinking, the lack of empirical support for Swedenborg's assertions may make his work less compelling or worthy of serious study.

3. Alternative Perspectives: There are numerous philosophical, psychological, and scientific perspectives that offer valuable insights into the human experience, ethics, and the search for meaning. Atheists may find more relevance and intellectual stimulation by exploring ideas and theories that align with evidence-based methodologies and rational inquiry, rather than delving into the metaphysical claims and mystical experiences put forth by Swedenborg.

4. Time and Focus: Every individual has limited time and attention to devote to their intellectual pursuits. Atheists may choose to focus on topics and disciplines that align more closely with their interests, values, and worldview. Considering the vast array of subjects available for exploration, studying Swedenborg's religious writings may not be a priority for an atheist seeking to expand their knowledge in areas that align more closely with their own perspective.

5. Critique of Religion: Some atheists actively engage in critical analysis and critique of religious beliefs, practices, and ideologies. Swedenborg's work, being deeply intertwined with his religious convictions, may not offer much material for constructive critique or intellectual challenge from an atheist perspective.

Ultimately, the decision whether or not to study Swedenborg or any particular subject is a personal one, and individuals may have their own unique motivations and interests. Atheists, like anyone else, are free to explore a wide range of topics and should choose areas of study that resonate with their intellectual curiosity and contribute to their personal growth and understanding of the world.

These are great. Both the one in favor of studying Swedenborg and the one against. 

As far as I can see they are both true, reasonable, and cover a variety of arguments that one might make. 

The second one, against studying the subject, is especially impressive to me because it makes the point without insults, expressions of superiority, or atheist mottos ("what's asserted without evidence..."). Even a passionate Swedenborgian could understand and agree with it.

Bravo, Mr. AI.

Yes well I agree we could learn a lot from the way the AI behaves, and I too sometimes wish we could have more neutral/objective/respectful discussions, but it just feels to me like the world is more divided now than it's ever been. It's frankly very depressing but it is what it is.

Just curious Neo. Have you tried chat with the same seed text over an extended time (day/week/month)? Interested in if comes up with the same response, or at least something closely similar.

If you rearrange the seed text (but not the overall meaning) does the response change?

Posting from ignorance. I know almost nothing about chat.

(May 11, 2023 at 6:52 pm)brewer Wrote: Just curious Neo. Have you tried chat with the same seed text over an extended time (day/week/month)? Interested in if comes up with the same response, or at least something closely similar.

If you rearrange the seed text (but not the overall meaning) does the response change?

Posting from ignorance. I know almost nothing about chat.

I seriously recommend trying it... I haven't been able to put it down all evening... it's just absolutely incredible and feels just like talking to another person.

Not quite an answer to your question to Neo but maybe similar, you can ask it a question, say compose a poem, then say 'another one?' and it will generate a whole new response based on the same input.

(May 11, 2023 at 7:03 pm)emjay Wrote:

(May 11, 2023 at 6:52 pm)brewer Wrote: Just curious Neo. Have you tried chat with the same seed text over an extended time (day/week/month)? Interested in if comes up with the same response, or at least something closely similar.

If you rearrange the seed text (but not the overall meaning) does the response change?

Posting from ignorance. I know almost nothing about chat.

I seriously recommend trying it... I haven't been able to put it down all evening... it's just absolutely incredible and feels just like talking to another person.

Not quite an answer to your question to Neo but maybe similar, you can ask it a question, say compose a poem, then say 'another one?' and it will generate a whole new response based on the same input.

Yeah, probably not. I'm old school, don't even cell phone.

Saying 'another', I'd assume that is a trigger for the AI to create a different poem.

Google's Bard is being touted as a competitor for ChatGPT. Somebody told me that it's been significantly upgraded recently. You can use it without signing up, so I gave it a try.

So far it seems to be less wordy than Chat. It also comes across as very reasonable and middle-of-the-roadish. I tried several prompts to get it to say angry, partisan things against religion, and it wouldn't. At one point it just kind of gave up and said something along the lines of "I'm a language model and I can't address that."

(May 11, 2023 at 7:54 pm)brewer Wrote:

(May 11, 2023 at 7:03 pm)emjay Wrote: I seriously recommend trying it... I haven't been able to put it down all evening... it's just absolutely incredible and feels just like talking to another person.

Not quite an answer to your question to Neo but maybe similar, you can ask it a question, say compose a poem, then say 'another one?' and it will generate a whole new response based on the same input.

Yeah, probably not. I'm old school, don't even cell phone.

Saying 'another', I'd assume that is a trigger for the AI to create a different poem.

Ah. Believe it or not, I can relate. I don't like change; ie I'm a late-adopter of things too... several years late switching from VHS to DVD, and then again several years late before I got my first smart phone, several modern things people take for granted I've never tried at all, like Twitter, and now it seems several months late on trying ChatGPT. And like all of those other things in the list above, I'm basically kicking myself for not trying it sooner

Anyway, in case you change your mind all it requires to signup is an email address and phone number capable of receiving text messages (to send you a code that you then enter), so even a basic cell phone would probably be fine if you meant you don't have a smart phone, but other than that it's just like signing up for any other webpage.

As to it's output I saw a video on YouTube of how it works internally. It's complicated so don't quote me on it (I can link the video if you want) but in general it's both a neural network and also uses a sort of reward-based feedback system for grading its outputs, with that feedback presumably coming from the natural feedback you give it while chatting with it (ie it's so realistic talking with it that you... well at least I... can't help but say 'thank you', or 'well done', or 'good job' etc), so my guess is that the alternative offerings it gives you if you prompt it for more, are just those different rated outputs... but that's just a guess.