AI learnt "something" from the Physical & Life Sciences Forum.

[Hans Blaster]

I think it also depends on who is asking the question and what assumptions they hold about the world and beyond. For example you could ask 'Is there a God' and I sure it will come up with the empiricle data that God cannot be verified.

If you train the LLM on the scientific literature, it won't have any idea what this "God" is. If you feed it creationist apologetics, it will respond with creationist apologitics. Train it on those "atheist/apoloogist" or "science/creationist" debates and it will likely either "bothsides" the argument "some people say x, others say not-x", or it will spit mangled garbage like "the genetic evidence of common descent demonstrates that their is a god because intelligent design is falsified."

But the same question asked philosophically the possibility of there being a God' it will make good arguements for belief in a God.

Same as above GIGO.

I think the bigger issue is integrating human consciousness into the equation. This is something science or logic cannot determine and would have to include the phenomenal experiences which may also give justification for proper belief in God or something like a consciousness beyond the material processes.

Which a machine or software could not determine without the ability to have human conscious experiences. As opposed to say mathmatical equations or physics which have objective measures.

"AI"s run on NVidia GPUs, not mind meat. If you want humans involved, humans are going to have to do all of the work. You can't just rely on some word-order predictor.