Philosophy Now Forum

Right. See the OP. It's about the honesty of ChatGPT, and its reliability as a neutral source. From a neutral point of view, Trump is unethical, so it's good. I thought you said: This isn't about Republicans and Democrats duh I think you do see the point. But you'd rather spit at the content than d...

Hmmm...so you're happy because it was the opposition that got cut out this time? And you're fine if the next programmer happens to be pro-Trump, and undercuts the Democrats? This isn't about Republicans and Democrats... Right. See the OP. It's about the honesty of ChatGPT, and its reliability as a ...

I'd say ChatGPT was originally correct for not praising Trump as he is quite unethical, now they broke it :) Hmmm...so you're happy because it was the opposition that got cut out this time? And you're fine if the next programmer happens to be pro-Trump, and undercuts the Democrats? This isn't about...

Peterson didn't ask ChatGPT to praise Trump, or I didn't find that one... See above. I left the link. Were you perhaps unfamiliar with the term "laudatory"? You might want to look that one up before you reply. Ah okay, someone got this one when he tried it with Nixon: I'm sorry, as a neut...

Peterson didn't ask ChatGPT to praise Trump, or I didn't find that one, he just asked it to write a poem, and that's what ChatGPT did:



And the poem is pretty accurate.

Works now, terrible poem though In realms of power, a fiery blaze, Trump's presence casts a vivid gaze. Through trials fierce and storms unkind, He stood, unwavering, in his mind. With fervor fierce, he led the way, A maverick in the light of day. His voice, a trumpet, loud and clear, Ringing out fo...

No things. All is energy - patterned (ordered) and non-patterned (chaotic). All is dynamic interactivity. The ancients used fire or water as their representational metaphor. Abstraction = simplification/generalization of what is present. Present = manifestation of past - interpreted as appearance. ...

7 dimensions: The 7th dimension is an infinite space-time universe with infinite dark matter and dark energy, which corresponds to the limited dark matter and dark energy in our 6-dimensional classical finite space-time universe. If the 7th dimension is an infinite icy ocean, then our 6-dimensional...

Well at least you two finally agree on something. After all you both live in some kind of alternative reality.

Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 4:32 pm Come to think of it, when there's a troll like moron dick-for-brains around, anyone could be it. I could be. Anyway, I'm done. Or am I?

Yeah yeah but what's the actual reason you don't want to admit that you exist?

What? I'm a pathological liar. And Kant's distinction between noumena and phenomena is 'entirely consistent with both modern science and modern psychology'. And I don't want to admit that I exist. Wtf are you talking about? Frankly, if this is what you've got, do one. Not interested. Still more of ...

I beg to differ. Here's part of the link you suggest: 'Indirect realism is broadly equivalent to the scientific view of perception that subjects do not experience the external world as it really is, but perceive it through the lens of a conceptual framework...' That's pure Kant. It's got 'the exter...

That's what I'm asking. You claim three things refute direct realism: Kant, science and psychology. And then you say science and psychology refute Kant. So I'm confused. Perhaps you could set out the premise(s) of indirect realism - to clear it up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_and_indirect_...

But why don't they refute indirect realism? Refute it how? That's what I'm asking. You claim three things refute direct realism: Kant, science and psychology. And then you say science and psychology refute Kant. So I'm confused. Perhaps you could set out the premise(s) of indirect realism - to clea...

That may be the right diagnosis. And I'm sure that Kant's disastrous noumena/phenomena distinction is at the root of it. The distinction by itself is actually fairly useful, it's only disastrous when we do what Kant did and claim that the noumenon is 100% unknowable. That's actually an insane guess...