Unsure if this is a useful answer. But Searle/LLM could make something that looks like it has a creative spark, and that's it.
Why I think that's different is in the case of a human artist, they create something because they have something they want to say. Whatever they produce is a way of saying 'this is what the world feels like to me, is it the same for you?'. And if it is, it resonates.
But I cannot see how an LLM would 'want' to say anything. If we're talking psychoanlytically of where wanting comes from, and call it a desire to fill a void of how incoherent you actually are, then an LLM doesn't go through that process.
Maybe Searle does, and still wants the characters to make you feel a certain way, in which case the comparison doesn't fit.
> If we're talking psychoanlytically of where wanting comes from, and call it a desire to fill a void of how incoherent you actually are, then an LLM doesn't go through that process.
Ironically, many people complain LLMs are too incoherent, with all their confabulations and hallucinations.
But I agree. Desire is a good verb. I think that's what differentiates us from the 'machines'. In art, we try to create meaning. From our lives. From our discontents. Even a million LLMs cannot be in deficit of meaning; they are precisely tuned to their own capacity. Whereas something strange about humans is our endless desire for 'more'.
I'm not convinced we do "want" to say anything, though. The combinations of physical inputs (which mostly translate to hormones i imagine?) and data inputs seem to drive my behavior to such a degree that i question if i could really do anything else at any given moment.
The whole free will debate seems a bit out of scope (and out of my reach, hah), but nonetheless it feels interesting in the LLM context.
edit: Note that i don't necessarily think LLMs are there or even can be. We seem to technologically small to produce the complexity in ourselves. Nonetheless i'm always interested in how far reduced complexity can take us.
Yes, DP breeds expertise. But I don't think you can just decide to do DP.
An expert craftsman/woman does that craft everyday because they LIKE doing it, expertise might not even be the goal. Think of Nobel Prize winners, is the core thing that they did DP, or is it they were having enough fun (loose definition) that DP is how they wanted to spend their time.
I think the lesson for a young person is still find what you love. But with this you can say: find what you love, then sacrifice yourself to it.
I disagree, lots of craftsmen do deliberate practice to improve their skills, even when it's not necessarily enjoyable. Hobbyists probably don't so much, but people who do a specific craft for a living do. Granted sometimes this ends up being 2nd or 3rd level fun, where it's not fun while you're doing it but looking back gives you a sense of accomplishment and enjoyment later.
I remember taking a ceramics class in high school and they showed us a video called 'the potters way' or something similar and the trick to getting good at making simple pinch pots is to make thousands of them until you essentially have the muscle memory to do it. There are probably moments of zen while spacing out and making them, but I can guarantee that no one would find that enjoyable enough to just crank them out for hours at a time if they weren't trying to improve their skills.
I get your point, but many people find what they love and throw themselves into it without the intention or discipline to keep progressing.
Millions of amateur artists and musicians spend hours daily working on their craft without ever noticeably improving past an intermediate learner's level.
I think there's something in how a good shrooms high makes you feel that 'you' are less real, and that something like nature is more cohesive and real than you are used to thinking about it.
But as someone else said, the next day you don't care anymore and you don't actually think you unlocked a new dimension. The experience of what drugs feel like doesn't seem like a valid way to get at the true nature of anything.
Was ready to be super sceptical but this is interesting. The measure gets at ways of showing uniqueness (e.g. defending a view thats different from everyone else's, not caring what others think). So I can buy that has descreased.
What I bet hasn't decreased is the extent to which people say they want to be unique.
Well it may also be the difference between needing to express uniqueness as a mechanism to display it to others. If I'm secure that I'm a unique individual, I may not need to express it or demonstrate it.
(which I don't think is quite the right construct for what it describes but they had to run the politics of the DSM to get something in there) you might
(1) think you are unique when you have a condition that maybe 3-5% of people have,
(2) try as hard as you can to "mask" your condition
God, my daughter says she “just wants to be normal.” Hard for me to understand. Can’t tell if it’s TikTok, living in the Netherlands or the happily weird father figure.
> What I bet hasn't decreased is the extent to which people say they want to be unique.
FTA:
> In our study of over one million participants surveyed from 2000 to 2020, we found that need for uniqueness was lowest among participants who took the survey most recently in 2020 compared to those in 2000.
So it seems that the desire for uniqueness has decreased, unless I'm reading this incorrectly. That's a surprise to me just based on my observations and possible biases.
The desire to be unique tends to decrease with age as a person's self identity starts to settle in.
As the population increases, there's more people in the identity-building phase of life at one time than ever before. So while the individual desire does decrease, I believe you are right that the overall desire globally has not.
Unsure if this is a useful answer. But Searle/LLM could make something that looks like it has a creative spark, and that's it.
Why I think that's different is in the case of a human artist, they create something because they have something they want to say. Whatever they produce is a way of saying 'this is what the world feels like to me, is it the same for you?'. And if it is, it resonates.
But I cannot see how an LLM would 'want' to say anything. If we're talking psychoanlytically of where wanting comes from, and call it a desire to fill a void of how incoherent you actually are, then an LLM doesn't go through that process.
Maybe Searle does, and still wants the characters to make you feel a certain way, in which case the comparison doesn't fit.