That's an informative perspective; thanks. Maybe we're lucky here!

I read the first few pages here but not all 21. I see it's closed; the end comments seem heated but not bad, but then I'm not sure about the Baden quote of someone else without comment:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8608/god-almost-certainly-exists

This is a mediocre OP, but the topic I find to be worthy of the main forum. Has it been asked a thousand times? Yes, and that indicates something about the question. Anyways:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8503/know-thyself-is-it-the-beginning-of-all-wisdom

This is MASSIVE (I don't know if I agree, and I would have approached the topic with more nuance myself, but)

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8541/philosophy-is-mainly-about-style-not-substance

Controversial, and I don't condone it, but this one stayed main page for a good while if I'm not mistaken

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8481/the-wldm-movement-white-lives-dont-matter

A quick scan of this one seems a little nutty but I like the topic, and it's a topic I'm interested in

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8424/is-the-evolution-of-technology-infinite

That's just a quick cursory glance; there have been others over the past year or more. And this has all been just off the top of my head as I browse through.

Can a feature be integrated where any thread that doesn't fit ones personal conception of what real philosophy is gets moved to The Lounge? Based on personal preference parameters that one sets when one joins?

My fav mod is @andrewk because every time I see his name (which is never) I think it's Andrew W.K., and I imagine that Andrew W.K. himself is an estranged mod here who had a bad falling out with @Baden years ago, and is now too ashamed to show his face and moderate. But all he has to do is show up...

The AI poetry reminds me of this high level of technical know-how sans the burning desire to express something that one holds to be important — javra

Yes yes yes.

As an apropos, for decades now, one litmus test for good quality poetry I’ve pointed out to is the poet's ability to express the positive aspects of intense romantic love via metaphorical concepts in manners that don’t result in kitsch, i.e. in something one deems to be silly if not worse. This to me is one of the most difficult things to accomplish via poetry. — javra

I really appreciate the audaciousness of this idea of yours because it's so true. To write a love poem (the most stereotypical of stereotypes) is truly a great feat. And it does test the metal of the poet. And I can't imagine reading an AI poem that moves me to the degree of a great love poem written by a human. Well said.

One potential, positive, way of framing that comes to mind is : it helps us, by negation, to focus on what is important to us in poetry. If an AI can do this and this, then maybe it can help us recognize when we, too, are in autopilot, just doing this and this, deluding ourselves. not to shut us down, but refocus. — csalisbury

Sure, that's a potential positive byproduct, but surely it wasn't worth the dollars and hours required to produce this AI jargon. Surely that's just an accidental bonus.

The second thought is that the AI becomes just another part of the natural world, and its words are just one swirl of things among others - they’re an accretion of language. I’ve been reading Moby Dick and Starbuck gets at Ahab about seeing an offense in something incapable of giving offense. It’s just another part of what is now. — csalisbury

That's maybe a deeper philosophical point, yeah. I.e. a question of the position that AI holds in the world now. But that feels like a larger question that doesn't just include AI generated poetry. But still applicable, yeah.

This would be something like collective smoke filtered through another medium to produce uncanny almost-poem plumes. — csalisbury

I just re-read this and got all sorts of mis-firing, conflicting thoughts. If poetry is the smoke that you refer to, how does this AI poetry actually fit in to that metaphor? By way of your smoke metaphor (which I Love) I can't honestly place the AI poetry. If we follow the metaphor, I would categorize the AI poetry as steam, not smoke.

I think ‘genuine’ poetry is often something like the smoke generated from an intense spiritual encounter - say smoke rising from an altar, where the sacrifice is the poet’s encounter ( with something) — csalisbury

:fire:

Yeah, I found a bit of beauty here and there. I guess, to be fair, I've read some contemporary poetry that made me angrier than this AI stuff did...so in that sense, I guess I prefer the highlights of fake AI poetry over chic contemporary word salad diarrhea.

Between mouthfuls of apple pie,
they discuss the panda's defection,
the new twelfth-man problem, the low
cardinality of Jesus, and whether
Saint John broke the bread at the Lord's Supper
instead of the guest Aava.
Their talk is either philosophical
on the one hand, or distressing personal
on the other.
Eve, it is whispered, died of exposure. — csalisbury

Yeah, that's an interesting poem, AI or not. Again...psychologically, I wonder what I would have thought of it if I hadn't known.

Overall though, I'm interested in why we find this interesting. Poetry feels like the most fragile art form because language is so fleeting and changes so much, and it's emotional content is so personal. So, as a lay poet and songwriter, and as a lover of words, I do feel some sense of being attacked here. If AI can write better poetry than us, and if our poetry is so fragile in the first place, then what does this even achieve for AI, and what is achieved via AI for us? Our words are already faulty and failing. Why should we use Ai to pantomime ourselves and taunt our failures with caricatures of what we've tried to say in the past?

Sure, but are are we not moving away from the classic definition of being able to capture the transcendental, the fixed and unchangeable, as in a mimesis, and more towards continentalist theories of art. — Forgottenticket

Sure, and that's the cultural context, at least per your view of current poetry.

True, and if an adult were to have written it, it would not have been published.

Yes, I know. Practice is the hard work of art...

Eh. There are no accurate percentages. If perspiration suggests practice, then of course it's crucial, but I would say inspiration would be more like a 90% cut. But practice isn't only 10%. So the pithy quote breaks down, in my view.

By "genuine" I was suggesting that a natural creative process will produce poetic language; if it doesn't, it would be more akin to some sort of scientific (AI generated, maybe?) process. Yes, the creative process does throw up new possibilities. In my own experience, the best (most genuine) work tends to be a process of "all the ideas are given at the beginning, and are then refined over time". But there is a mysterious alternative where, occasionally, half-formed ideas that have promise can be slowly perfected over time. EDIT: but the original "genius" (in the original sense of that word) almost always suffers and loses something. But I find this process to be the exception to the rule. But no, any good writer or artist hopefully understands the importance of "drafts", so drafts are absolutely important. As is the process of the whole thing. I think we're mainly in agreement.

“Genuine”. This is getting tricky now. Isn’t it possible a metaphor may come to mind spontaneously while in the process of writing or playing with an idea? Is that not genuine simply because it was spontaneous? — Brett

I'm not sure how it's getting tricky, because what you described there is basically what I meant. So going back to you saying "On the other hand if it was regarded as a first draft with work to be done then that could change. Metaphors and similes might be formed at that stage", what I meant in responding was that metaphors are generally spontaneous, rather than requiring drafts. That may be an oversimplification; of course new metaphors could spring up on repeated drafts. But in my own experience of writing poetry, poetic language does tend to be spontaneous, and not something that is improved much with drafts; usually a few simple versions, maybe, but generally, the original "inspiration" of the language is what sticks; drafts only refine, they don't redefine.

I agree. But there are more genuine and less genuine ways.

I didn't think you were arguing for anything in particular necessarily; just responding with some thoughts.

There's contemporary information in the lines, which I assume was part of the information the AI absorbed. That doesn't equate to a style.

I'm not sure if you've ever written a poem or not, but metaphors and similes (i.e. poetic language) generally are not added later...

Which actually brings up something else that was bothering me with the AI poems; there aren't many metaphors or similes. Ironically, if anything, the oblique language of the second poem almost reads like a bad translation.

Here's a further wrinkle beneath a wrinkle: we're so far only dealing with the English language here. To say nothing of the notorious untranslatability of poetry.

Yeah sure, all I'm saying is that a studied poet understands it's history, and their place in that history, and their work will probably flow naturally from that historical position that they occupy. AI on the other hand, if it's referencing a boat load of poetry from the past 1,000 years, would do so seemingly at random...unless there are elements in the code that delineate eras and styles. But reading these examples from the OP, there's absolutely no tone or style. It's completely flat. So if there is an element to the code that generated those poems that did take style and era into consideration...it certainly doesn't come across at all.

Can you provide support for the idea that poets "raid the pantry", and maybe define what that means?

The overall voice reminds me of poetry written by a child - but a kid with some promise. Some of it gave me a chuckle. I don't know. It would have been interesting to read this without knowing it was generated by AI.

If I wanted to get a little more in depth, I would wonder what eras and traditions the poetry the AI was fed come from. Poetry is so dependent on cultural context. If you read Paradise Lost today, you might appreciate it or even love it, but the style, and even the content will feel removed and sort of academic, in the sense that it's not so visceral to your own real experience; in contrast to something like the John Ashberry stuff you've been posting, for instance. So that being said, if doing this is just a fun game, then whatever. But if there's any hope of actually generating compelling poetry, you would need to take cultural context into consideration...but philosophically, I'm pretty opposed to this sort of thing myself. I wanted to avoid pulling the "those deng compooters can't replace the human spirit dammit!" card, but that's where I stand...anyways.

Never saw the video before. :100:

For the first time, I whole-heartedly agree. Not that it means anything, but :clap:

I can't get into his bird song stuff. I don't know if it's because I'm a bird lover myself, and I'd rather listen to birds themselves, maybe? But here's a bird-y piece I love; stirs my Finnish blood:

mehhh

A dumb riddle with no philosophical implications.

Plastic bag pigeons
Billow slowly overhead
The soft city groans

If it used to be the love of wisdom, I guess it's now the love of the analytic brain.

Irish folk music juxtaposed atop Eno-inflected ambient soundscapes...

https://foveahex.bandcamp.com/track/we-sleep-you-bloom

Melodramatic but still...something there

https://ulver.bandcamp.com/track/all-the-love

No.

Thanks. :cheer: I did listen to this piece around the start of everything. It's a work that needs no words said about it.

Taking a deep dive into some really deep 90's obscure shit. Can I get an amen? No? Anybody at all? All good

For anyone else musically inclined (or otherwise):

https://wamu.org/story/20/04/24/the-library-of-congress-wants-djs-and-you-to-make-beats-using-its-audio-collections/?utm_campaign=nprmusic&utm_term=music&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3Blsv6tczLDGE8hn5m0F82sJ8MDZNRrdoX4i-fVRlLo7aQYw7S8SV47XY

Recently got through a re-watch of Twin Peaks (seasons 1 and 2), and just now re-watched Fire Walk With Me. Jesus Christ that is a fucked up film. Looking into the most cost-effective mode to re-watch season 3 (i.e. The Return). Also fucked up, but deeper, weirder and more confusing...

Another fun thread thrown into the dustbin. "Thou shalt not have fun!!"

I affect by un-feeling in this thread?

I feel unaffected by this thread.