• snooggums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Acting like the entire history of the philosophy of knowledge is just some attempt make “knowing” seem more nuanced is extremely arrogant.

    That is not what I said. In fact, it is the opposite of what I said.

    I said that treating the discussion of LLMs as a philosophical one is giving ‘knowing’ in the discussion of LLMs more nuance than it deserves.

    • irmoz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I never said discussing LLMs was itself philosophical. I said that as soon as you ask the question “but does it really know?” then you are immediately entering the territory of the theory of knowledge, whether you’re talking about humans, about dogs, about bees, or, yes, about AI.