Here’s a recent thread on philosophy of AI from Twitter/X, in which I address rather popular arguments made by Emily Bender and others to the effect that LLM outputs are strictly speaking meaningless. I think these argument are flawed, as I explain below. But I think it’s worth categorising these as post-Searlean critiques, following John Searle’s infamous arguments against the possibility of computational intentionality. I think post-Searlean and post-Dreyfusian critiques form the main strands of contemporary opposition to the possibility of AI technologies developing human-like capacities.
Continue reading TfE: On Post-Searlean Critiques of LLMs
DEONTOLOGISTICS 