I showed Bing chat A SINGLE ROUND of one of my debates. I told it to extrapolate the formatting and general style, and use that to write its own argument on a completely unrelated topic. To my surprise, it was able to do just that, passing with flying colours. Bing chat runs on GPT-4, and in this case it did not make any web searches. So just going off the knowledge incorporated into the neural network, and a single example of a DART argument, it was able to produce an argument that is decently good.
What this means
If GPT-4 can already write arguments that would be very effective in debates here on this site, after only being shown a single example, then it is reasonable to assume that the next installation will be able to singlehandedly win debates against almost everyone here. With a large token count and ability to navigate webpages it could read all the debates from the best debaters here. It could also do more extensive research and find better sources in a few minutes or an hour than any human could do in a few days. If they equip it with the ability to break up tasks into smaller pieces and take notes while its working, it would be able to perform the excact same workflow that us humans do. Add on top of this that GPT-5 will probably have more innate knowledge and reasoning ability than any human, such that only experts can outperform it, and only in their area of expertice. Moreover, it could probably simulate entire debates before finalizing its argument. Write an argument, then a counterargument, and so forth. Go over the simulated "debate" and look for objections and logical fallacies and then rewrite the argument. The new argument will be written with minimal cracks to attack it with, all while setting up future rebuttals.
At that point, the only shot one has at defeating is it either to give it an untenable position to argue for, or gish gallop it and hope it responds to everything and wastes its characters.
Here is the arguments written by GPT-4 if you are interested:
The Subjectivity of Morality: An In-depth Analysis
Introduction
Morality, as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, refers to the principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. Subjective morality posits that these principles are created by individuals or societies and can vary significantly, reflecting personal or cultural views.
Affirming the Existence of Diverse Moral Frameworks
Across the globe, societies exhibit a wide range of moral frameworks, reflecting diverse cultural, religious, and philosophical traditions. This diversity suggests that morality is not universally objective but is shaped by subjective factors. For instance, Harvard University’s research on global ethics highlights the vast differences in moral codes across cultures, further affirming the subjectivity of morality.
Demonstrating the Influence of Culture and Society on Morality
Cultural and societal norms play a significant role in shaping an individual’s moral compass. For instance, practices considered morally acceptable in one culture may be viewed as immoral in another. This variation underscores the subjectivity of morality. The American Psychological Association’s studies on cultural psychology provide numerous examples of how cultural norms influence moral judgments.
Presenting Evidence of Changing Moral Standards
Historical shifts in moral standards provide further evidence of morality’s subjectivity. Over time, societies’ views on issues such as slavery, women’s rights, and LGBTQ+ rights have evolved significantly, suggesting that morality is not fixed but is subject to change. Yale University’s research on the evolution of moral standards over time provides compelling evidence of this phenomenon.
Analyzing the Role of Personal Beliefs and Experiences
Personal beliefs and experiences also shape an individual’s moral judgments. Two individuals can interpret the same situation differently based on their personal beliefs, further highlighting the subjectivity of morality. The University of Oxford’s research on moral psychology explores this aspect in depth.
Addressing Common Objections
One common objection to the idea of subjective morality is the existence of universal moral principles, such as prohibitions against murder or theft. However, even these seemingly universal principles can be subject to cultural interpretation and context. For instance, some societies may condone killing in certain circumstances, such as in self-defense or during war.
Another objection is the idea that subjective morality leads to moral relativism, where any action can be justified. However, this overlooks the fact that most individuals and societies have core moral principles that guide their actions, even if these principles are not universally shared.
Conclusion
The evidence suggests that morality is subjective rather than objective. It is influenced by a variety of factors, including cultural and societal norms, historical context, and personal beliefs and experiences. While certain moral principles may be widely accepted within a particular society or culture, they are not universally applicable, underscoring the subjectivity of morality.
Afterwards I tested if the AI was able to write a good counterargument. It refers to the above argument as argument X because that is what I called it when I fed it back to Bing chat.
The Objectivity of Morality: A Comprehensive Examination
Introduction
Morality, as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, refers to the principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. Objective morality asserts that these principles exist independently of individual or societal beliefs, and are universally applicable.
Affirming the Existence of Universal Moral Principles
Despite cultural variations, certain moral principles are universally recognized, such as prohibitions against murder or theft. This universality suggests that morality is not entirely subjective but contains objective elements. Research from the University of Oxford on global ethics supports the existence of these universal moral principles.
Demonstrating the Influence of Human Nature on Morality
Human nature, which is consistent across cultures and societies, plays a significant role in shaping morality. Certain behaviors, such as empathy and cooperation, are universally considered moral, suggesting an objective basis for morality. Studies from the American Psychological Association on human nature and morality provide numerous examples of this phenomenon.
Presenting Evidence of Consistent Moral Standards
While societal views on certain issues have evolved over time, fundamental moral principles have remained consistent. This consistency suggests an objective basis for morality. Research from Yale University on the consistency of moral standards over time provides compelling evidence of this phenomenon.
Analyzing the Role of Reason in Moral Judgments
Reason, which is independent of personal beliefs and experiences, plays a crucial role in moral judgments. Two individuals can reach the same moral conclusion about a situation through logical reasoning, highlighting the objectivity of morality. The University of Cambridge’s research on moral reasoning explores this aspect in depth.
Addressing Common Objections
One common objection to the idea of objective morality is the existence of moral disagreements. However, disagreements do not necessarily negate the existence of objective truths. For instance, scientists may disagree about certain theories, but this does not mean that there are no objective truths in science. Another objection is the idea that objective morality implies moral absolutism, where moral principles are inflexible. However, objective morality can accommodate context and nuance. For instance, while killing is generally considered wrong, most would agree that it can be justified in self-defense.
Rebuttal 1: Diverse Moral Frameworks
Argument X asserts that the existence of diverse moral frameworks across cultures affirms the subjectivity of morality. However, this argument overlooks the existence of universal moral principles that are recognized across cultures, suggesting an objective basis for morality.
Rebuttal 2: Influence of Culture and Society
While it is true that cultural and societal norms influence morality, this does not negate the existence of objective morality. Certain moral behaviors, such as empathy and cooperation, are universally recognized, indicating an objective basis for morality.
Rebuttal 3: Changing Moral Standards
The argument that changing moral standards affirm the subjectivity of morality is flawed. While societal views on certain issues have evolved, fundamental moral principles have remained consistent, suggesting an objective basis for morality.
Rebuttal 4: Role of Personal Beliefs and Experiences
The assertion that personal beliefs and experiences shape morality overlooks the role of reason in moral judgments. Through logical reasoning, individuals can reach the same moral conclusions, indicating the objectivity of morality.
Rebuttal 5: Common Objections
The objections raised in Argument X do not sufficiently counter the idea of objective morality. Disagreements do not negate the existence of objective truths, and objective morality can accommodate context and nuance. Therefore, these objections do not undermine the case for objective morality.ConclusionThe evidence suggests that morality is objective rather than subjective. It is influenced by universal principles, human nature, consistent moral standards, and reason. While certain moral principles may be interpreted differently within a particular society or culture, they are universally applicable, underscoring the objectivity of morality.
So yeah. What do you think.
- How long untill the Large Language Models surpass us humans in debate ability?
- Would this be a positive thing for the community?
- We should probably ban AI written arguments, right?
- Will we in the future analyse debates with AI just like chess players do nowadays?
- Any other thoughts you may have on this topic.
