[harrall]

In cognitive science, it appears your brain has two modes of thinking:

- A very parallel type of computation that is fast and generally accurate and integrates hundreds of variables. It’s sometimes labeled as intuition or system 1 thinking.

- A much slower, step by step, analytical type, commonly linked with your pre-frontal cortex (one of the newest parts of the brain). Sometimes called system 2 thinking.

Maybe the way the universe works is that all computation more or less is one of those two types. In which case, an LLM alone is only the first part, which is often right but its results also cannot ever be proven.

[stevemk14ebr]

An LLM is not thinking, assuming and relating it to thought and universal truths is nonsense.

[dgellow]

We inflicted that to ourselves by picking the most confusing terminology ever. "No, reasoning isn't thinking. No when the model says it thinks it's not actually thinking... No an agent isn't actually a creature with agency... No, when we say it hallucinates it doesn't, like, actually hallucinate"

[triyambakam]

What were the alternatives?

[coldtea]

How is it's process (inputs, training weights, processing those weights based on an initial given state -prompt-) different than how a brain thinks? And is it a difference of architecture and scale (like an ENIAC and a Apple Silicon M5) or a difference of fundamental operation?

[flextheruler]

While I'm sure professionals in neuroscience or philosophy can expound on this topic in a more satisfactory manner than myself, I think a relevant point is that despite all our efforts we still don't know how brains think.

[brookst]

Did you mean sentient?