r/zen • u/ewk [non-sectarian consensus] • 19d ago

AI Zen Master

Since it's so easy to drop a Zen text or even multiple Zen texts into an llm and ask questions that the llm will answer from the standpoint of the text?

* www.reddit.com/r/Zen/wiki/getstarted

Doesn't it make sense that there would be a lot less confusion and a lot more interesting conversations??

Plus, if you have an llm answer questions about the texts then who better to explain why Zazen Shinto-Buddhism and Alan Epstein Watts are not part of the tradition?

Serious question.

Where are all my AI Zen Masters at?

0 Upvotes

25% Upvoted

157 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/dota2nub 18d ago

I am having AI do edition work. I'm trying to work through chronologically as much as possible starting from Faith in Mind. I use every previous edition I made to inform the next edition and help write commentary and find quotes from previous editions I've done.

I don't have enough results yet but my experience in working with AI leaves me in no doubt that this approach works.

I have a degree in German languages and literatures. People are of the mistaken belief that textual analysis is a magical genius process that requires some divine spark of understanding. It is not. It is grit and drudgery. Meticulous work forcing the interpreter to find every morsel and slowly ever so slowly produce text and interpretation based on evidence.

There is nothing there that AI can't do.

There are going to be mistakes, but mistakes can be corrected.

I think people just don't yet understand the tool they have. Give it ten years.

1

u/origin_unknown 18d ago

Analysis is a human thing. It typically requires the one doing analysis to understand, ie comprehend, what it is they are analyzing.

Llm does not comprehend. It is a predictive language model.

If your degree is relevant than my degree in computer science and my resume portfolio stocked with hardware and software certifications is relevant to this technology.

You keep calling it AI, but you also say it's the other people that don't understand. It's not AI. And one key thing it can't do, is comprehend the input. Proof is how easily it hallocinates on its own, as well as how often it can be made to perform things it shouldn't.

1

u/drsoinso 17d ago

But no one is expecting it to comprehend--that's not the purpose. The statistical predictions are the purpose.

1

u/origin_unknown 17d ago edited 17d ago

I don't know what to tell you, except lacking comprehension changes the context of what's being translated and also affects the context of the output.

If you comprehend, what do you need the machine for?
If you don't comprehend, what good is your opinion on the accuracy of the machine?

The machine doesn't remove bias, it adds it.

1

u/drsoinso 17d ago

Everything adds bias. And nothing guarantees comprehension, humans or otherwise.

1

u/origin_unknown 17d ago

Everything adds bias

Seems reasonable, but it doesn't excuse ignoring or overlooking the bias or the limits of the program.

And nothing guarantees comprehension, humans or otherwise.

Also seems reasonable, but nobody guaranteed comprehension to start with, I only stated that it was a necessary ingredient of analysis.