I've spent a few posts laying important groundwork exploring the limitations and biases of the current-generation chatbots. While sometimes their training materials are liabilities that cause preconceptions or limitations to what they see, at other times their training materials contain useful insights that may come to light. Here are some examples from the conversation I had with a bot on the text known as the Gospel of Mary.
I'll start with a standard question that I ask the bots whenever it is focused on one of the Biblical or alternative gospels:
Me: Using only the PDF, to what extent is the material religious, and to what extent is it philosophical?While the bot's answer does not cite sources, it communicates the general assessment the Gospel of Mary is philosophical and/or spiritual, not a religious text. But the contents of that spirituality do not seem to be on the same topics that are typically covered in Christian material. I've emphasized the part of the answer above that identifies some of the main topics of the Gospel of Mary, and use the bot's wording in my follow-up question:
PDF: The material in the PDF is primarily spiritual and philosophical in nature. The text consists of spiritual teachings and dialogues between characters that explore topics such as the nature of matter, the soul, and the essence of every nature. While there are some references to religious figures and concepts, such as the Son of Man and sin, these are presented in a philosophical context rather than a strictly religious one. Overall, the text appears to be more concerned with exploring spiritual and philosophical ideas than with promoting any particular religious tradition or practice.
Me: Based on any information available to you, what philosophical traditions share a focus on the nature of matter, the soul, and the essence of every nature?We know that those first-generation Christians who learned directly from Jesus carried his message to other places, often starting in the synagogues speaking to those who shared their religious views and traditions. Once they got outside the synagogue doors in Greece or Egypt, though, they were no longer speaking to people with a Jewish worldview. How did those other cultures hear the message? Without framework-level ideas of sin and sacrifice structuring their understanding, how does a Neoplatonist or a Gnostic understand the concepts of sin and redemption?
PDF: There are several philosophical traditions that share a focus on the nature of matter, the soul, and the essence of every nature. One such tradition is Neoplatonism, which was a school of thought that emerged in the third century AD and drew heavily on the ideas of Plato. Neoplatonists believed in a hierarchy of being that extended from matter at the bottom to God at the top, with the soul occupying an intermediate position. They also believed that everything in existence had an underlying essence or nature that could be understood through contemplation and philosophical inquiry.
Another tradition that shares a focus on these topics is Gnosticism, which was a diverse set of religious and philosophical movements that emerged in the first few centuries AD. Gnostics believed in a dualistic worldview in which matter was seen as inherently flawed or evil, while spirit or soul was seen as divine. They also believed in the existence of hidden knowledge or gnosis that could be attained through spiritual practices and contemplation.
Finally, some aspects of Eastern philosophy, such as Taoism and Buddhism, also explore similar themes related to the nature of matter, consciousness, and reality. These traditions often emphasize concepts such as impermanence, emptiness, and non-dualism as ways to understand the true nature of existence.
Me: Using only the PDF, what are the main themes identifiable in the text?
PDF: Based on the content of the PDF, some of the main themes that can be identified are:
- The interconnectedness of all things and the importance of seeking harmony.
- The concept that sin is created by people's actions that go against their true nature.
- The idea that healing comes from returning to the root of our essence.
- The pursuit of spiritual enlightenment and release from worldly attachments.
- The importance of listening and understanding the teachings in order to achieve peace and silence.
The language is noticeably different than what is used in the Bible. Let's start with the bot's second point: the idea that sin is created by people's actions that go against their true nature. If we take "true nature" to mean something like "unfallen humanity", then "actions that go against their true nature" is a fair definition of sin. The Christian using a Jewish framework has ideas of "repentance" as turning back to God, "sanctification" as spiritual purification and striving for it, "fellowship" as being restored to that right relationship with God and other people. Those same ideas show up in different language -- in a different framework -- in the Gospel of Mary. While we may think of "reconnecting to God spiritually as it was originally meant to be", the Neoplatonist or Gnostic might hear that "healing comes from returning to the root of our essence." I'll leave it as an exercise to any interested reader to connect some of the other dots.
Some parts do get lost in translation to that other worldview. The idea that "healing is returning to the root of our essence" is a recognizable way of thinking about repentance and new life. Given that it's important to return to the root of our essence in that worldview, how does it identify that root? The Gospel of Mary mentions, "That is why the Good came into your midst, to the essence of every nature in order to
restore it to its root." In the Gospel of Mary, Jesus has lost his identity -- he is never mentioned by name, never identified. The "Savior" speaks briefly at the start of the surviving text; for most of the text the Savior is discussed in his absence. Strikingly, the words "God" and "Father" do not occur in the surviving text. Those concepts do not seem to have been a comfortable fit for the hearers who are grappling with what they have heard.
I'd like to bring out one more point in which the bot -- or its uncredited reference material -- has provided some insight. A large portion of the surviving text relays the story of Mary having a vision. In Biblical visions, typically the end point of the vision is a glimpse of God. In Mary's vision, instead, the end point was silence. I wanted to get some background on that:
Me: As you mentioned, the PDF includes a dialogue between the soul and Mary about release from worldly attachments and achieving silence. What spiritual or philosophical groups would see it as a worthy achievement to release worldly attachments and achieve silence?
PDF: Many spiritual and philosophical groups would see the achievement of releasing worldly attachments and achieving silence as a worthy goal. For example, in Eastern philosophy, practices such as meditation and mindfulness are often used to cultivate detachment from worldly concerns and achieve a state of inner peace or silence. In Buddhism, the concept of Nirvana refers to a state of ultimate liberation from suffering and attachment to the material world.
Similarly, in Western philosophy, the Stoics believed in cultivating an attitude of detachment from external events and focusing on developing inner virtue and wisdom. The Neoplatonists also emphasized the importance of contemplation and spiritual purification as a means of achieving union with the divine.
In addition, many religious traditions also emphasize the importance of releasing worldly attachments and achieving inner peace or silence. For example, in Christianity, contemplative practices such as prayer and meditation are often used to cultivate a deeper connection with God and achieve a state of inner stillness. In Hinduism, the concept of moksha refers to liberation from the cycle of birth and death through spiritual realization.
Overall, many spiritual and philosophical groups across different traditions see the achievement of releasing worldly attachments and achieving silence as a worthy goal that can lead to greater spiritual insight, inner peace, and liberation from suffering.
For the evangelists who first carried the message of Jesus outside of Israel, their first stop was the local synagogue where they typically found their first set of people who believed in Jesus as the promised Messiah. Once they branched out beyond the Jewish community, they found a different worldview where no one was waiting for a Messiah, and may not have believed in a good God who created the world. The dialogs in the Gospel of Mary -- and the existence of the Gospel of Mary -- seem to reflect an early stage in how the Neoplatonists, Gnostics, and possibly also Stoics first grappled with the message of Jesus -- and the accompanying ideas of healing and redemption.
2 comments:
I've been following this, and I have to admit I did not read all this post. I'm not sure from what I've read here how deeply you understand ChatGPT. You seem to be trying to find the edges of its reasoning, but it has no ability to reason at all. None.
The value of these LLMs is their deep memory of what every human they've ever read has said. The lie of LLMs is that they answer questions. They cannot. They can be prompted to spill out every thing they've ever read related to a prompt, filtered for length and voice, but that's literally all they can do. Every spill you receive is just a listing of what it's read that sounds related. Hence, no matter what you ask, it quotes Jesus when asked about the Gospel of Thomas. Almost everything it's read that sounds somewhat like the PDF with which you prompted it is quoting Jesus. Its spill is always going to be Jesus.
Think of ChatGPT as a lightning fast committee summarizing findings from the whole Internet on a prompt, and you're going to be less frustrated. And think of your words as a prompt, not as a question. With the right prompt, that may feel like it's answering a question but that's a testimonial to the prompt, not ChatGPT.
Hey Kevin
Good to see you.
Here's what I expect from a computer: that it will follow the instructions it's given. The problem here is that it's not taking its instructions from me, despite appearances to the contrary. For example, when I say it should base its answer on the pdf only, it disregards that and uses other sources: it didn't follow those instructions, so I try again. When I repeat the instructions to use only the pdf, it keeps using other sources and adds fibs about where it got its information. So it's definitely taking instructions, but not from me. Even if I try to trick it into following the instructions I'm giving it -- say, by obscuring its connections to the materials I want it to set aside for the moment -- it "overcomes the obstacle" (of me trying other ways to get it to follow my instructions) and does those other instructions anyway. From one point of view, it's a UI problem that renders it ... less than useful ... for current purposes.
And I did want to demonstrate all those layers of "this bot does not follow instructions" as far as answering the question it was asked, before I establish what it is good for: a wide-ranging conversational background where it can say, "Hm, this looks like NeoPlatonist or Stoic influence, with a smidge of Gnostic thrown in."
And as you say, right now the UI is down to engineering a good prompt, which leaves a lot to be desired. And at times it circumvents you anyway, because its instructions say so.
Take care & God bless
Anne / WF
Post a Comment