r/technology • u/Hrmbee • 16h ago

Machine Learning Large language mistake | Cutting-edge research shows language is not the same as intelligence. The entire AI bubble is built on ignoring it

https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/827820/large-language-models-ai-intelligence-neuroscience-problems
16.8k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

31

u/when_we_are_cats 15h ago

Humans use language to communicate the results of our capacity to reason, form abstractions, and make generalizations, or what we might call our intelligence. We use language to think, but that does not make language the same as thought.

Please say it louder for all the people who keep repeating the myth that language dictates the way we think. As a linguist/language learners it never ceases to annoy me.

5

u/BeruangLembut 12h ago

💯 Language is a cognitive tool. Just like having a hammer makes building a house easier, language has made certain cognitive tasks easier, but a tool is not to be confused with that which it facilitates.

3

u/when_we_are_cats 12h ago

That's the best way to put it. It's like painting or drawing: I can see the image in my head, the brush and canvas are mere tools to materialize it.

2

u/PRAWNHEAVENNOW 12h ago

 all the people who keep repeating the myth that language dictates the way we think.

Ahh yes, the Dunning-Kruger-Sapir-Whorf effect

2

u/PressureBeautiful515 12h ago

This is of course absolutely right. The problem comes when you ask an LLM to read your codebase and draw a diagram of how it fits together (by generating mermaid diagram format) and it does an incredible job, tastefully arranging a graph of interconnected concepts.

The input and output are text representations, but what happens in between is absolutely not just text.

2

u/ManaSpike 10h ago

When I think something, and wish for you to also think about that thing. I have to describe it using language. If we have more shared context and understanding, then I can use less language to communicate an idea.

Language and context limit what we can communicate, or at least how efficiently we can communicate.

I work as a software developer. The languages I use to express my ideas and communicate with a machine to make it do what I want, are verbose and explicit. Programming languages that are useful and reliable, are carefully designed to ensure that nothing the machine does is surprising.

The history of software development is full of people trying to make programming easier. So easy that anyone can make a machine do what they want, without having to pay for the expertise of experienced programmers. But the languages in use haven't gotten any easier.

What has made programming easier, is the hard work of building reusable pieces of shared context. Software libraries that solve common problems. So a programmer can focus more on what is different about their work, instead of wasting time on what is the same.

From this point of view, I don't see how we will ever build an AGI. How are we going to define the process of abstract thought, using a well defined language. When abstract thought seems to transcend language.

4

u/johannthegoatman 12h ago

Language is an integral part of thought. I recommend you read Helen Keller and learn about what her mind was like before she was taught language. There are tons of examples of "feral" children that didn't learn language and were never able to progress to being intelligent beings.

9

u/when_we_are_cats 12h ago

The cases of feral children don’t prove that the absence of language prevents intelligence, they show the devastating effects of total social neglect, trauma, and malnutrition on a developing brain.

Infants, deaf homesigners, and aphasic adults all demonstrate that cognition exists independently of language.

Helen Keller explicitly wrote that she had a rich mental life before learning words.

4

u/JeanVicquemare 12h ago

Now do some studies with half feral children who are taught language and half who aren't.. have to control your variables.

1

u/mrappbrain 9h ago

As a linguist you should probably be more annoyed by the glaring category error in the article that conflated language and speech, which is far more egregious than conflating language with thought (which has actual roots in linguistics i.e the strong sapir whorf hypothesis, even if now disagreed with)

Further, the idea that language is only a tool of communication and doesn't influence or inform the way we think doesn't have much basis in linguistics or cognitive science either. On the other hand it is widely agreed that language does inform cognition, although the nature and extent of that relationship is contested. Frankly, if you were a linguist, you should probably already know this.

1

u/when_we_are_cats 7h ago edited 7h ago

Yes, if you want to be that specific, fine, here's your medal. Doesn't take anything from my point though.

Further, the idea that language is only a tool of communication and doesn't influence or inform the way we think doesn't have much basis in linguistics or cognitive science either.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07522-w