"But we can’t forget that there is a third option: That, while the Yu-gi-oh lore doesn’t matter—because it’s made up, like our statutes—the life lore does. That’s morality; that’s religion. Higher law is the prerequisite to words having any greater telos than fixture in time. The trouble is that BYU’s 5G tower of babel can’t reach that higher law, if there is one at all. Neither can OpenAI. And neither can the Eleventh Circuit."
If the statutes are 'made up,' there's nothing wrong with using equally 'made up' tools to figure out what they mean. Ergo, textualism, dictionaries, etc. The fact that dictionaries don't solve every ambiguity doesn't render them useless. Ditto for corpus linguistics.
"Choose your gods carefully."
Or maybe just stop trying to keep stuffing theological mumbo jumbo into everything.
I am reminded here of Paul de Man’s admonition not to confuse the materiality of the signifier with the materiality of what it signifies: “no one in his right mind will try to grow grapes by the luminosity of the word ‘day,’ but it is very difficult not to conceive the pattern of one’s past and future existence as in accordance with temporal and spatial schemes that belong to fictional narratives and not to this world. This does not mean that fictional narratives are not part of the world and of reality; their impact upon the world may well be all to strong for comfort.” (“The Resistance to Theory,” p. 11)
AI may soon perfectly navigate the semantics of legal text, but will likely remain imperfect in translating reality into abstractions to which those texts can be applied - Textualism requires both
In the article’s case - has judge AI received and abstracted all relevant information/context about the situation and state of the world to which it can apply its perfect textualist understanding? If so, then this is truly general intelligence with far greater impact than legal interpretation
It seems that translating experience/intuition/feeling -> abstraction is where humans retain an advantage in art, mathematics, lit, law
"But we can’t forget that there is a third option: That, while the Yu-gi-oh lore doesn’t matter—because it’s made up, like our statutes—the life lore does. That’s morality; that’s religion. Higher law is the prerequisite to words having any greater telos than fixture in time. The trouble is that BYU’s 5G tower of babel can’t reach that higher law, if there is one at all. Neither can OpenAI. And neither can the Eleventh Circuit."
If the statutes are 'made up,' there's nothing wrong with using equally 'made up' tools to figure out what they mean. Ergo, textualism, dictionaries, etc. The fact that dictionaries don't solve every ambiguity doesn't render them useless. Ditto for corpus linguistics.
"Choose your gods carefully."
Or maybe just stop trying to keep stuffing theological mumbo jumbo into everything.
I am reminded here of Paul de Man’s admonition not to confuse the materiality of the signifier with the materiality of what it signifies: “no one in his right mind will try to grow grapes by the luminosity of the word ‘day,’ but it is very difficult not to conceive the pattern of one’s past and future existence as in accordance with temporal and spatial schemes that belong to fictional narratives and not to this world. This does not mean that fictional narratives are not part of the world and of reality; their impact upon the world may well be all to strong for comfort.” (“The Resistance to Theory,” p. 11)
AI may soon perfectly navigate the semantics of legal text, but will likely remain imperfect in translating reality into abstractions to which those texts can be applied - Textualism requires both
In the article’s case - has judge AI received and abstracted all relevant information/context about the situation and state of the world to which it can apply its perfect textualist understanding? If so, then this is truly general intelligence with far greater impact than legal interpretation
It seems that translating experience/intuition/feeling -> abstraction is where humans retain an advantage in art, mathematics, lit, law
RE-TRUTH!