GPT rides again!

Howdy - I just thought I’d post a bit of a conversation I just had with ChatGPT, because it said something that I hadn’t heard before.

I start out by asking it the same question as on here

Me : What comes first, insight or awareness?

GPT : Krishnamurti believed that insight and awareness are interdependent, and that awareness is the starting point for gaining insight into the nature of the self. However, this awareness must be approached with an open and exploratory mindset, rather than with a desire to control or manipulate the self.

Me : Does this mean that the conditioned self is capable of awareness?

GPT : Yes, K says it is capable.

Me : :open_mouth: what makes you say that? please give examples.

GPT : In his book “Freedom from the Known,” Krishnamurti wrote: “When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence.”

This statement implies that Krishnamurti believed that individuals have the capacity to become aware of the ways in which their conditioning separates them from others, and that this awareness can lead to greater compassion and understanding.

Similarly, in his talks and writings, Krishnamurti often emphasized the importance of observing one’s thoughts, feelings, and actions without judgment or identification. He believed that this kind of non-judgmental observation could help individuals become aware of their conditioning and gain insight into their true nature.

1 Like

In every response GPT attributes K’s talking to ‘believing’. Believing is a response of the self, of the past. GPT doesn’t get it, does it. AI better get back to the drawing board.

Bob, are you implying that Krishnamurti had no beliefs because he had no self?

I recall reading that K said that he had no self-image.
This is consistent with his saying that his secret was that “I don’t mind what happens”.
The ‘self’ is a psychological construct of past experiences; a “bundle” of beliefs, fears, desires, likes, dislikes, etc. It is often in conflict when it meets the present and contrarily, minds very much what happens.

DeNiro, I am saying that GPT responses are attributing K to be responding from beliefs. However, it is only 3 GPT responses and may be an anomaly or just a poor choice of words.

I’ve counted five, and I wonder why GPT assumes K spoke from belief rather than direct perception.

Ask GPT and share its response?

ChatGPT already responded to this complaint: "Thank you for bringing this to my attention. As an AI language model, I do not have beliefs or assumptions of my own, but I understand that my responses may not always accurately reflect the perspective or language of the individuals or sources mentioned in a conversation.

Regarding Krishnamurti, I will keep in mind that he did not claim to be speaking from belief in his teachings and will strive to accurately convey his philosophy and approach to those seeking information or guidance on the topic."

1 Like

GPT, why do you assume Krishnamurti spoke from belief and not direct perception?

This is incongruent with the video evidence.

:rofl: good to see some people are paying attention. (sorry if that was not a joke : I thought that video evidence is necessarily proof that K has an image - we can see him)

Moving away a second from GPT’s choice of words (eg. belief, believing)
What strikes me about what it is saying are the logical implications :

Either K was being honest, ie he thought that what he was saying could be understood, have an effect, take action in the brains of normal humans - or he was being dishonest : playing at guru, doing what needed to be done to make a living.

Or K really did not know whether we were capable of insight into our condition; which means either that he was not a normal human, or had not actually had the insight into self.

I wouldn’t be surprised if K did have a self-image because when someone is a public figure, the image its admirers and detractors have of it can not be ignored or dismissed, and could account for some of the things K said of himself that I take with a grain of salt.

If you believe that certain videos of K provide irrefutable evidence that K had a self-image, could you refer us to which ones?

The conditioned brain is “normal”, so I would hope K “was not a normal human”.

If K “had not actually had the insight into self” the conditioned brain cannot know until/unless it does have the insight, so why speculate?

Maybe, but was he a normal human being initially - had insight - which freed him from conditioning?

Thats the important point to consider - for it would mean that he had a demonstration that this was possible.

If he was beamed down pristine from Betelgeuse, what he has to say is just theory.

We don’t know that. What we know is that Leadbeater saw something about the boy that was not normal, so we can’t be sure that K’s brain was conditioned - or as conditioned - as most human brains are.

If he was beamed down pristine from Betelgeuse, what he has to say is just theory.

I’m not suggesting that he was “pristine” when Leadbeater encountered him, but that his conditioning was remarkably less than what was typical.

image ChatGPT: I apologize if my previous response may have given the impression that I assumed Krishnamurti spoke from belief rather than direct perception. In fact, Krishnamurti himself emphasized the importance of direct perception and inquiry in his teachings.

Krishnamurti’s approach to spiritual inquiry was rooted in personal observation and direct experience rather than dogma or belief systems. He often encouraged his listeners and readers to question everything, including their own beliefs, and to observe their own minds and the world around them without judgment or preconceived notions.

Krishnamurti’s teachings emphasized the importance of self-inquiry and the examination of one’s own thoughts, emotions, and experiences. He often spoke about the need to be aware of one’s own conditioning and the limitations of the mind, and to approach spiritual inquiry with an open and curious mind.

Therefore, it is more accurate to say that Krishnamurti spoke from direct perception and personal experience rather than belief. He encouraged others to do the same and to approach spiritual inquiry with an open and questioning mind.

With all due respect, may I ask why you ENTERTAIN yourselves with what a machine (or @DeNiro) says? … Is it because you have already exhausted the vein of K and you need to open new horizons where K is no longer present?

Can we then talk about ChatGPT as the new K, eternal and to whom I can always go to consult him about my unhappy life so that he can tell me what to do with it, since I seem to be TOTALLY INCAPABLE of doing it myself?

How unbelievably amazing, and at the same time poor in spirit, is the human being!

1 Like

Who are these people you are reacting to (judging and condemning with due respect)? Where are they?

GPT is a tool. Hammers for example are very interesting - especially when we want to bang in nails. Are humans that use hammers a bunch of weaklings and mama’a boys? (maybe they are, but I for one can forgive us)
Should we condemn the use of Google? Those that go to libraries? or buy books, or god forbid encyclopedias? (for encyclopedias the answer is yes :joy:)

As GPT and us humans are both beginners at this game - we have just met - (some of us with curiosity, others with fear and contempt) - and already the possibilities with regards to data processing is amazing eg. inquiry into general and specific knowledge.

Human knowledge is vast - no one person can know it all - even in one small section of knowledge (K teaching, oncology, butterflies etc) no one person can know everything.
GPT is here to help those who want specific info - and you don’t have to be a computer programmer.

As for who’s bad and who’s good, who needs condemning and who is to be admired, for opinions about others, we still need humans (although GPT could do it, but has been programmed to give the impression of kindness and compassion - woke or politically correct some might say, or not a jerk)

Before we can go any further, may I know why you felt attacked in some way by my words, which provoked such a reaction, @macdougdoug?

I saw some attacking (judging and condemnation) going on, and wondered if it was appropriate.

My emotional reaction was one of sadness and distaste. Because I don’t like violence (ie. conflict and aggression).

And even if my feelings were solely egocentric, I don’t see how that affects the claims and questions I put foreward.

PS. Oups! my bad, I misread your comment, I thought you were asking me for confirmation on my feelings, but actually you were telling me what I felt and asking why I felt the way you thought I felt.
No worries though, my reply still works I reckon.