Ask ChatGPT: Kim Dae-sik and ChatGPT, translated by Choo Seo-yeon and others, “The Future of Humanity Ask ChatGPT” (East Asia, 2023)

Hwa-seon Kim
{"title":"Ask ChatGPT: Kim Dae-sik and ChatGPT, translated by Choo Seo-yeon and others, “The Future of Humanity Ask ChatGPT” (East Asia, 2023)","authors":"Hwa-seon Kim","doi":"10.37736/kjlr.2023.06.14.3.06.233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This review examines the meaning of ChatGPT, a state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) model developed by OpenAI, and Professor Kim Dae-sik, a brain scientist, exchanged questions and answers on topics such as human relations, love, and happiness, risks facing mankind, God's existence and death. First, we asked ChatGPT, Google Bard, and Microsoft's search engine “Newbing” to write a book review on “The Future of Mankind Ask ChatGPT,” and then analyzed the contents and composition of each answer. The book review written by ChatGPT was presented in the form of “Overall Introduction-Book Composition Method and Theme-Limitations and Significance of ChatGPT-General Review,” and the flow of the article was generally smooth, but it was difficult to find the writer’s fresh perspective. Google’s Bard article confirmed that the text generation method of artificial intelligence chatbots focuses on universal summaries and simple and clear explanations rather than individuality and originality. Microsoft’s search engine “Newbing,” based on the GPT-4 model, specifically cited the contents of the book to increase reliability and reveal the source in consideration of the issue of intellectual property infringement. \nLooking at the conversation scenes between humans and machines, I thought about the significance of the conversation. In order for “ask-answer” to be a process of generating meaning, curiosity, and curiosity about not only oneself but also others and the world must be placed behind it. In addition, to continue the conversation, a literacy ability to discover meaning is required, and literacy presupposes the ability to read between the lines and grasp contextual knowledge. This eventually requires the imagination to fill the gap and the overall perspective to grasp the relationship between the part and the whole, the part and the part. The process of finding meaning is the ability to think about surplus and outside and grasp the context, and if you say one thing, it is no different from the sense of recognizing heat. The sensibility that knows how to capture nuances belongs to the realm of humanism, which is essential for humans to sense and judge an object or phenomenon. \nTherefore, Professor Kim Dae-sik’s conclusion in “Epilogue II” of “The Future of Humanity Ask ChatGPT” has great implications. The eye to distinguish the voices of individuals, which contain nuances subtly different from those that “probabilistic parrots” imitate plausibly, is based on humanities knowledge that cannot be easily filled with the names of efficiency, probability, and practicality. To exist as thinking human beings, we realize again that we must ask ‘why’ rather than ‘what’ and rely on the logic of coincidence and the specific context of life, not on the axis of stochastic thinking. And at the core of it, there is humanity that repeatedly asks and answers with a long-term perspective.","PeriodicalId":372781,"journal":{"name":"Korean Association for Literacy","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Association for Literacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37736/kjlr.2023.06.14.3.06.233","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This review examines the meaning of ChatGPT, a state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) model developed by OpenAI, and Professor Kim Dae-sik, a brain scientist, exchanged questions and answers on topics such as human relations, love, and happiness, risks facing mankind, God's existence and death. First, we asked ChatGPT, Google Bard, and Microsoft's search engine “Newbing” to write a book review on “The Future of Mankind Ask ChatGPT,” and then analyzed the contents and composition of each answer. The book review written by ChatGPT was presented in the form of “Overall Introduction-Book Composition Method and Theme-Limitations and Significance of ChatGPT-General Review,” and the flow of the article was generally smooth, but it was difficult to find the writer’s fresh perspective. Google’s Bard article confirmed that the text generation method of artificial intelligence chatbots focuses on universal summaries and simple and clear explanations rather than individuality and originality. Microsoft’s search engine “Newbing,” based on the GPT-4 model, specifically cited the contents of the book to increase reliability and reveal the source in consideration of the issue of intellectual property infringement. Looking at the conversation scenes between humans and machines, I thought about the significance of the conversation. In order for “ask-answer” to be a process of generating meaning, curiosity, and curiosity about not only oneself but also others and the world must be placed behind it. In addition, to continue the conversation, a literacy ability to discover meaning is required, and literacy presupposes the ability to read between the lines and grasp contextual knowledge. This eventually requires the imagination to fill the gap and the overall perspective to grasp the relationship between the part and the whole, the part and the part. The process of finding meaning is the ability to think about surplus and outside and grasp the context, and if you say one thing, it is no different from the sense of recognizing heat. The sensibility that knows how to capture nuances belongs to the realm of humanism, which is essential for humans to sense and judge an object or phenomenon. Therefore, Professor Kim Dae-sik’s conclusion in “Epilogue II” of “The Future of Humanity Ask ChatGPT” has great implications. The eye to distinguish the voices of individuals, which contain nuances subtly different from those that “probabilistic parrots” imitate plausibly, is based on humanities knowledge that cannot be easily filled with the names of efficiency, probability, and practicality. To exist as thinking human beings, we realize again that we must ask ‘why’ rather than ‘what’ and rely on the logic of coincidence and the specific context of life, not on the axis of stochastic thinking. And at the core of it, there is humanity that repeatedly asks and answers with a long-term perspective.
《问ChatGPT:金大植和ChatGPT》,秋瑞妍等人翻译,《问ChatGPT:人类的未来》(东亚,2023年)
OpenAI开发的最先进的自然语言处理(NLP)模型“ChatGPT”和脑科学教授金大植就人际关系、爱与幸福、人类面临的危险、上帝的存在与死亡等问题进行了交流。首先,我们请ChatGPT、b谷歌Bard和微软的搜索引擎“Newbing”写一篇关于“人类的未来问ChatGPT”的书评,然后分析每个答案的内容和组成。ChatGPT撰写的书评以“总体导论-书的写作方法和主题- ChatGPT的局限性和意义-总评”的形式呈现,文章总体流畅,但很难找到作者的新鲜视角。b谷歌的Bard文章证实,人工智能聊天机器人的文本生成方法侧重于通用的总结和简单清晰的解释,而不是个性和独创性。基于GPT-4模型的微软搜索引擎“Newbing”,考虑到侵犯知识产权的问题,特意引用了该书的内容,提高了可靠性,并透露了出处。看着人与机器之间的对话场景,我想到了对话的意义。为了使“问-答”成为一个产生意义的过程,好奇心和对自己,对他人和世界的好奇心必须放在后面。此外,为了继续对话,发现意义的读写能力是必需的,而读写能力的先决条件是阅读字里行间和掌握语境知识的能力。这最终需要想象力来填补空白,需要整体视角来把握局部与整体、局部与局部的关系。寻找意义的过程,就是对过剩和外在的思考能力,以及对语境的把握能力,如果你说一件事,这和认识热度的感觉没有什么区别。懂得捕捉细微差别的感性属于人文主义的范畴,是人类感知和判断一个物体或现象所必需的。因此,金大植教授在《人类的未来问ChatGPT》的“后记二”中的结论具有重要的意义。分辨与“概率鹦鹉”似是而非地模仿的声音有细微差别的个人声音的眼睛,是建立在不能轻易用效率、概率、实用性等名称填充的人文知识基础上的。作为有思想的人而存在,我们再次意识到,我们必须问“为什么”而不是“什么”,并依赖于巧合的逻辑和生活的具体背景,而不是随机思维的轴。在它的核心,是人类不断地以长远的眼光提问和回答。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信