I’ve talked with Gpt (as I like to call it) about Putnam and Quine on conceptual schemes. I’ve talked with it about Ζeno’s paradoxes. I’ve talked with it about behaviourism, causality, skepticism, supervenience, knowledge, humour, catastrophic moral horror, the container theory of time, and the relation between different conceptions of modes and tropes. I tried to get it to persuade me to become an aesthetic expressivist. I got it to pretend to be P.F. Strawson answering my objections to Freedom and Resentment. I had a long chat with it about the distinction between the good and the right.
…And my conclusion is that it’s now really good at philosophy…Gpt could easily get a PhD on any philosophical topic. More than that, I’ve had many philosophical discussions with professional philosophers that were much less philosophical than my recent chats with Gpt.
Here is the full Rebecca Lowe Substack on the topic. There are also instructions for how to do this well, namely talk with Gpt about philosophical issues, including ethics:
In many ways, the best conversation I’ve had with Gpt, so far, involved Gpt arguing against itself and its conception of me, as both Nozick1 (the Robert Nozick who sadly died in 2002) and Nozick2 (the imaginary Robert Nozick who is still alive today, and who according to Gpt has developed into a hardcore democrat), on the topic of catastrophic moral horror.
And as many like to say, this is the worst it ever will be…
The post Why you should be talking with gpt about philosophy appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
