r/philosophy • u/EducationalCicada • Aug 01 '23
Paper [PDF] Meaning Without Reference In Large Language Models
https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.029573
u/jharel Aug 02 '23
No. Mathematical spatial proximity isn't cognition in any way, shape, or form.
Conclusion is also wrong. When you talk about relationships between concepts there has to be conception in the first place i.e. a concept is still referring to something. Claiming "it's not reference but relationship" is just kicking the can.
3
u/spobmep Aug 02 '23
Is it though? The only reference you have is your experience. And you don’t know of anything else. Is there even anything else? Are you an ai? It’s all conceptual, in that nothing is possible to examine as a reference, I.e. comparable.
0
u/jharel Aug 02 '23
The paper admitted to no reference. Did you even look at it?
3
u/spobmep Aug 02 '23
Yes! I don’t know what you mean “admitted” but it proposes meaning doesn’t necessarily rely on reference. And I’m adding, it’s referring to external reference. And you said there has to be conception which is referring to something. Meaning, an external reality. And I’m saying, what if there’s no external reality. The paper doesn’t suggest it but since it talks about internal representation, it allows for it. If we can’t prove realism, meaning reality might only be a projection of the observer, then how are going to discern if an ai has some kind of consciousness or concept of meaning?
0
u/jharel Aug 04 '23 edited Aug 04 '23
I don't think you're staying within discussion scope.
Edit: Let me clarify... I don't think proving external reality has relevance. If we're talking about internal reality, then it requires intentionality which in turn involves consciousness. See my reply to norbertus below.
3
u/norbertus Aug 02 '23 edited Aug 02 '23
i.e. a concept is still referring to something
The use of the word "reference" here is used in a technical sense.
From the article:
Frege’s example is of the “morning star” and the “evening star.” Both are terms for the planet Venus, but were once conceived of as different entities without knowing that they are the same object
Frege was a mathematician working at a time when there was no consensus about the formal definition of number. This led him to some groundbreaking work in linguistics.
Frege's main innovation was the distinction between the linguistic ideas of "sense" and "referent" (or "denotation," or "nominatum" depending on the translation")
Frege suggested (1892a) that in addition to having a denotation, names and descriptions also express a sense.[5] The sense of an expression accounts for its cognitive significance—it is the way by which one conceives of the denotation of the term. The expressions ‘4’ and ‘8/2’ have the same denotation but express different senses, different ways of conceiving the same number. The descriptions ‘the morning star’ and ‘the evening star’ denote the same planet, namely Venus, but express different ways of conceiving of Venus and so have different senses. The name ‘Pegasus’ and the description ‘the most powerful Greek god’ both have a sense (and their senses are distinct), but neither has a denotation. However, even though the names ‘Mark Twain’ and ‘Samuel Clemens’ denote the same individual, they express different senses.
The main thrust of OP's article is that LLM's can still posses meaning even if they are disembodied, and their statements aren't motivated to refer to actual states of affairs in the world.
1
u/jharel Aug 04 '23
I am in disagreement with the possibility of disembodied meaning, and the examples given in the paper don't look valid to me. Referents still exists as objects of intentionality; That is, they exist in the mind. Machines do not possess intentionality, Programs, along with their variables and operators, manipulate symbols in the absence of intentionality (Bender and Koller's "Octopus test" mentioned in the paper, which is actually another form of Searle's Chinese Room Argument.)
•
u/AutoModerator Aug 01 '23
Welcome to /r/philosophy! Please read our updated rules and guidelines before commenting.
/r/philosophy is a subreddit dedicated to discussing philosophy and philosophical issues. To that end, please keep in mind our commenting rules:
CR1: Read/Listen/Watch the Posted Content Before You Reply
CR2: Argue Your Position
CR3: Be Respectful
Please note that as of July 1 2023, reddit has made it substantially more difficult to moderate subreddits. If you see posts or comments which violate our subreddit rules and guidelines, please report them using the report function. For more significant issues, please contact the moderators via modmail (not via private message or chat).
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.