Using Chat GPT to discuss coin iconography

[Svessien]

Hi everyone

I take it you all have different opinions about AI. I'm a skeptic for sure, but my daughter has talked me into trying it. First I tried writing a novel. We came to page 80 before GPT4.0 actually lost the plot. Not easy to differ between the protagonist and antagonist if you have no morals or ethics, I suppose. Or soul. Well, anyway. With a paid subscription to the apocalyptic text generator, I could just as well try to use it on some coins that have interesting iconography.

I started with the bronze coins of Pitane, Mysia. I have been wondering about these coin, depicting a horned male deity on obverse, with a pentagram on reverse. It speaks to the mystic in me. The deity is usually described as Zevs, but I actually have my doubts. I have been wondering if it could be Pan, or another aspect of Ram, the Goat of Mendes. Without giving GPT more than the simple description of obverse and reverse, I asked it for interpretations of the iconography:

Mysia, Pitane.

AE16 (4th-3rd centuries BC).

Obverse: Male deity facing slightly right, wearing horns of Ammon. 

Reverse: ΠΙ - ΤΑ / ΝΑΙΩΝ. Pentagram; to right, serpent coiled right.

 

This is what GPT had to say:
 

The combination of a horned figure and a pentagram on the coin from Pitane, Mysia, suggests a rich tapestry of symbolism that may reflect various cultural, religious, and philosophical themes. Here are some interpretations of this combination:

1. Nature and Fertility: The horned figure may symbolize deities associated with nature, the wilderness, or fertility, while the pentagram could represent the five classical elements and the interconnectedness of life. Together, they might convey themes of growth, renewal, and harmony with the natural world.

2. Protection and Power: The pentagram is often viewed as a protective symbol, while the horned figure could represent divine or supernatural power. This combination might signify a relationship between protection, human endeavor, and the divine, suggesting that the figure could safeguard the community.

3. Spiritual Duality: The imagery may evoke a duality of existence—between the earthly and the divine, nature and civilization. The horned figure could represent primal forces, while the pentagram symbolizes more abstract, spiritual concepts, implying a balance between these elements.

4. Cults of Fertility and Agrarian Deities: It could reflect the worship of specific fertility deities or cult practices that emphasized the cycles of nature and agriculture. The horned figure may represent a deity linked to pastoral life, while the pentagram embodies agricultural prosperity and success.

5. Philosophical Connections: The combination may suggest an interest in esoteric knowledge and philosophical principles. The pentagram's association with mathematical and cosmic order could align with the horned figure’s representation of natural forces, indicating a blend of rational thought and mystical beliefs.

6. Cultural Syncretism: As a crossroads of various cultural influences, the imagery could represent a synthesis of local, Hellenistic, and possibly foreign ideas. It might indicate Pitane's unique identity, merging diverse traditions into a cohesive expression.

7. Cosmic and Spiritual Elements: The pentagram's association with the divine and the cosmos, when combined with the horned figure, may imply a deeper exploration of the universe's mysteries, reflecting ancient inquiries into existence, creation, and human experience.

Inscription: The inscription "ΠΙ - ΤΑ / ΝΑΙΩΝ" translates to "of the people of Pitane" or "of Pitane." This indicates that the coin was issued by the city and reflects civic identity and pride. It emphasizes the connection to the city of Pitane and its community, indeed serving as a representation of their collective beliefs and values.

Coiled Serpent in relation to the pentagram

1. • Symbol of Wisdom and Knowledge: Serpents are often associated with wisdom, healing, and knowledge in various mythologies. The presence of the serpent may suggest a connection to protective, transformative, or esoteric wisdom, which could align with the broader themes of enlightenment suggested by the pentagram.
   • Fertility and Agriculture: In some cultures, serpents also symbolize fertility and regeneration. When combined with the pentagram—a symbol of the earth and the elements—this might evoke ideas related to agricultural prosperity and the cyclical nature of life.
   • Duality: The serpent can also embody duality, representing both protective forces and the potential for danger. Its coiled position may signify stability or a dormant power waiting to be unleashed, which could further reflect themes of balance between creation and destruction.
   • Cosmic and Mystical Elements: The combination of the serpent and the pentagram on the coin could suggest a deeper mystical significance, perhaps pointing to the idea that the inhabitants of Pitane viewed their world through both rational and mystical lenses. The pentagram symbolizes cosmic order and the serpent may embody the mysteries of life and nature.
   • Cultural Context: The interpretation of the serpent will vary based on cultural and historical context. In ancient Greece, serpents could be linked to various deities (like Asclepius, the god of healing) and legends, integrating local beliefs with the broader Hellenistic religious framework.

In summary, the coin from Pitane featuring the inscription, pentagram, and coiled serpent conveys a complex narrative about the city’s identity, values, and beliefs. The combined imagery suggests themes of knowledge, protection, agricultural abundance, and the spiritual duality present in the natural world. Further study of local mythology and archaeological findings may provide additional insights into how these symbols were understood and revered by the people of Pitane.

[Svessien]

I did this with several coins, getting interesting answers. Another coin I have found puzzling is this coin:

I inserted the coin description, and told GPT that there was something about this coin that I found puzzling, asking it if it found anything particularly interesting about it itself:

CILICIA. Issos. Tiribazos, satrap of Lydia, 386-380 BC. Stater (Silver, 19.62 mm, 10.26 g). [AMI] Facing half-length figure of Ahura-Mazda, head to right, his body terminated by a solar disk, holding wreath in his right hand and lotus blossom in his left. Rev. [IΣΣIK-ON / 'tribzw' in Aramaic=Tiribazos] Ba'al standing front, head to left, holding eagle in his right hand and scepter in his left. Casabonne series 1. SNG Levante 175-6. SNG Paris 416-7. SNG von Aulock 5601-2. Obverse somewhat off center, otherwise, Very Fine. Rare.

 

GPT had this answer:

The AR Stater from Issos, Cilicia, minted during the reign of Tiribazos, satrap of Lydia, between 386 and 380 BC, serves as a remarkable artifact reflecting the cultural and religious syncretism of the period. The obverse features a facing half-length figure of Ahura-Mazda, the central deity of Zoroastrianism, depicted with his head oriented to the right. His body is elegantly terminated by a solar disk, symbolizing divine radiance and cosmic order. In his right hand, he holds a wreath, representing victory and divine approval, while a lotus blossom in his left hand signifies purity and the cycle of life, thus connecting Ahura-Mazda to the themes of creation, rebirth, and fertility. Accompanying this imagery is the inscription [AMI], which may denote the mint or specific cultural context associated with the coin.

The reverse of the coin features the powerful figure of Ba'al, a significant deity in the ancient Near Eastern pantheon, known for his associations with storms, fertility, and agriculture. Ba'al stands in a frontal pose, with his head turned to the left, conveying an authoritative presence. In his right hand, he holds an eagle, emblematic of sovereignty and power, while a scepter rests in his left hand, symbolizing authority and kingship. The inscription [IΣΣIK-ON], alongside the Aramaic word 'tribzw', links the coin directly to Tiribazos, emphasizing the political and administrative context of his reign.

This coin reflects the complex interplay of religious and cultural influences that characterized Cilicia during the late 5th century BC. By featuring both Ahura-Mazda and Ba'al, the coin suggests a desire to unify a diverse population of different backgrounds and beliefs, appealing to both Zoroastrian and Canaanite traditions. The blending of these deities on the same coin indicates a pragmatic approach to governance, recognizing the importance of accommodating various local beliefs to maintain authority and foster communal identity. The dual linguistic inscriptions, represented in both Aramaic and Greek, further highlight the region’s linguistic diversity, illustrating the intercultural dynamics at play in a satrapy under Persian dominion. Overall, the coin serves not only as a medium of exchange but also as a testament to the rich tapestry of cultural and religious life in Cilicia, reflecting the aspirations for divine favor and legitimacy among its diverse populace.
 

The combination of deities like Ahura-Mazda and Ba’al on the same coin does indeed suggest a fascinating yet complex interplay of cultural and religious values. While they represent different belief systems—Ahura-Mazda as the embodiment of wisdom, truth, and cosmic order typical of Zoroastrianism, and Ba’al as a more visceral representation of fertility, storms, and agricultural abundance in Canaanite religion—the decision to depict both on the same coin can be understood in several ways:

Cultural Syncretism: In regions where multiple cultures and religions coexisted, it was common for societal leaders and rulers to adopt elements from various belief systems. This practice, known as syncretism, allowed for the blending of deities and values to resonate with a broader audience, facilitating social cohesion among diverse populations.

Political Pragmatism: For a satrap like Tiribazos governing a culturally diverse area, representing multiple deities could be a political strategy aimed at appealing to various groups within the population. This approach would demonstrate sensitivity to local customs and beliefs, fostering loyalty and unity in a time of potential fractures due to differing cultural backgrounds.

Symbolic Representation: While Ahura-Mazda and Ba’al embody different aspects of divinity, they can be interpreted as complementary forces within a shared spiritual framework. For example, Ahura-Mazda’s association with cosmic order and truth may be considered supportive of Ba’al’s role as a provider of fertility and agricultural wealth. Thus, the two could be seen as interacting forces responsible for the balance of nature and the welfare of society.

Ritual Context: In practice, ancient peoples often integrated various deities into their rituals. Acknowledging both Ahura-Mazda and Ba’al could symbolize a comprehensive approach to worship, recognizing that different aspects of life—such as agriculture, prosperity, and cosmic justice—are all vital to existence.

Shared Ideals: Despite their differing values, both deities embody important ideals for their worshippers—Ahura-Mazda for enlightenment and goodness, and Ba’al for fertility and sustenance. By featuring both, the coin could encapsulate a unified aspiration for well-being and divine guidance among the populace.

In summary, while Ahura-Mazda and Ba’al originate from distinct religious traditions and represent varied aspects of the divine, their depiction together suggests a nuanced understanding of the complexities of belief in a multicultural society. This combination reflects a pragmatic approach to governance, inviting cooperation and interconnection between different cultural values that ultimately enrich the identity of the region.

[Svessien]

Have any of you had experiences with using GPT for this purpose, and what are your thoughts about it?

[Deinomenid]

With the caveat that I’m a big user of chatgpt4 and have integrated some features/functions successfully in a couple of customer-facing and backend business functions, I still struggle with it here. It can still hallucinate  and “speculate as fact” especially with unusual symbols or non-standard script (ie therefore lots of early Greek coin inscriptions). It’s what-ifs are sometimes in the “if my grandmother had wheels she’d be a bike” oddness range. Most worryingly, it presents opinion as fact and only then offers qualifications.

Eg this coin from - it wrongly insists- Kamarina. This was the second one I tried just now. (The first was a tricky coin symbolically so I gave it a pas on its terrible guess!) I’d say it got most of the key points hopelessly wrong here though too. 

 

This coin appears to be a tetradrachm from the ancient Greek city of Kamarina in Sicily, dating to the 5th century BC, around 425–405 BC. Here’s a detailed analysis of its features:

 

Obverse (Front Side):

• Depicts a nude youth riding a galloping horse, often interpreted as a symbolic representation of athletic prowess, possibly connected to equestrian competitions or the city’s military strength.

• The fine details of the horse and rider demonstrate the high artistry of Sicilian engravers during this period, known for their advanced techniques and designs.

• The inscription typically includes “ΚΑΜΑΡΙΝΑΙΟΝ” (KAMARINAION), which means “of the people of Kamarina,” affirming the coin’s origin.

 

Reverse (Back Side):

• Shows a standing figure, often identified as Heracles, holding a club and performing one of his labors. In some cases, this could also represent a local deity or a mythological figure tied to the city.

• The reverse also features other elements:

• A shrine or tripod, a symbol of religious or cultural importance.

• A springing gazelle or stag, likely representing the local fauna or an allusion to the city’s fertile territory and natural surroundings.

• The attention to detail in the reverse composition is typical of Kamarina’s intricate and well-balanced designs.

 

Historical Context:

• This coin likely reflects Kamarina’s efforts to assert its independence and identity during a time of shifting alliances and conflicts in Sicily, especially involving powers like Syracuse, Carthage, and the Athenian Expedition (415–413 BC).

• Kamarina’s coins from this era are celebrated for their artistic excellence and symbolic richness, often emphasizing themes of strength, divinity, and the city’s natural environment.

 

Significance:

• This tetradrachm would have been a high-value coin, used for trade and significant transactions, and its design reflects the pride and artistic achievement of Kamarina.

 

[Bannerknight]

I am a university lecturer, and I see that GPT, Grok and all the other AI's are gradually creeping into both scientific articles and student essays. It is relatively simple to get a C or a B on an essay if the text is intelligently edited. Which is why we are switching to more student presentations, oral exams and the traditional school exam. It is more costly and labour-intensive, but so far no easy solution is obvious. What students need to learn is learning how to learn, evaluating different information, asking the right questions, etc. AI is still prone to fantasy (inventing people and references, for instance), but lines are getting blurry.

But what no AI can give you is the pleasure of learning something new, of accumulating growing knowledge in a field of interest and the joy of finding unexpected connections and insights. Which is why I am on this forum, getting surprising knowledge about things I had a peripheral interest in to begin with. I love learning new things in numismatics! I think that is true for most of us.

Edited January 3 by Bannerknight

[Svessien]

15 hours ago, Bannerknight said:

I am a university lecturer, and I see that GPT, Grok and all the other AI's are gradually creeping into both scientific articles and student essays. It is relatively simple to get a C or a B on an essay if the text is intelligently edited. Which is why we are switching to more student presentations, oral exams and the traditional school exam. It is more costly and labour-intensive, but so far no easy solution is obvious. What students need to learn is learning how to learn, evaluating different information, asking the right questions, etc. AI is still prone to fantasy (inventing people and references, for instance), but lines are getting blurry.

But what no AI can give you is the pleasure of learning something new, of accumulating growing knowledge in a field of interest and the joy of finding unexpected connections and insights. Which is why I am on this forum, getting surprising knowledge about things I had a peripheral interest in to begin with. I love learning new things in numismatics! I think that is true for most of us.

I think asking AI of its intrepretation of the iconography wasn't so different from posting it on a forum and asking for opinions, to be honest. I think I got a fair answer, based on probability and knowledge. I can't count on the answer as a fact, but I don't think I would in any other event either. In addition, I actually got an answer straight away, there was no bickering over minor details or someones feelings being hurt because I unknowingly had written something terribly wrong, etc. So I hope it can be a good assistant to human kind. We just have to limit our trust in the answers we get, and not start relying too much on AI.

[Bannerknight]

34 minutes ago, Svessien said:

I think asking AI of its intrepretation of the iconography wasn't so different from posting it on a forum and asking for opinions, to be honest. I think I got a fair answer, based on probability and knowledge. I can't count on the answer as a fact, but I don't think I would in any other event either. In addition, I actually got an answer straight away, there was no bickering over minor details or someones feelings being hurt because I unknowingly had written something terribly wrong, etc. So I hope it can be a good assistant to human kind. We just have to limit our trust in the answers we get, and not start relying too much on AI.

I quite agree. I have used AI myself to generate texts, like "Write a history of Byzantine coinage", which I then can edit and elaborate. And I can see it can be a useful tool in searching for attribution and explaining iconography. When and if AI reaches sentience, I do hope somebody has already implemented Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics.

[NewStyleKing]

I don't get it. What could AI say that hasn't already been said? No one could know what already been said is accurate or not. Is the amphora on a NewStyle an olive oil container, plain an ordinary or a panathenaic games trophy or whatever! Just being AI makes it no more likely than ever.Afterall, a plain old common or garden olive oil container might have been presented at an event, imbuing something quotidian with stardust! We will never know.  

[Sulla80]

# What could AI say that hasn't already been said?

While it is not a magical panacea : I think AI (ChatGPT, google Gemini, Anthropic Claude) are all useful tools today.  The most useful features for me is the ability to quickly find what others have said without having to wander through pages of links (as search might offer).  It offers a nice complement to "Search" which can often overwhelm with links rather than getting specific about what content in those links might be useful and relevant to your question.

IMO - at least for now, human augmentation is the most useful, and numismatists will not be replaced by AI, but they will be replaced by numismatists who use AI. Can any of us imagine going back to a world where we didn't have many of the computer based tools and the internet was not available as a tool for access to auctions, exchange of ideas between experts, access to databases, access to literature, et.c.

Useful Tools: There are other capabilities that make research more productive: It also does a nice job of translating between languages, asking questions that provoke human thinking, extracting text from images, summarizing content from pdfs, and allowing one to chat with a large corpus of text (try uploading a big pdf). 

Making Content Interactive: I was impressed by NotebookLM's ability to generate a podcast from one of my Blog entries: listen here: https://www.sullacoins.com/post/pomegranates

Interpreting Images: In interpreting images it seems to be pretty crude in how it functions today. The more obscure the topic the more it seems to generate fantasy e.g. The letters SMNB on a AE of Theodosius it interprets as:

• Siscia Mint in ancient Roman coinage:
  • S = Siscia (modern Sisak, Croatia).
  • M = Mint.
  • NB = Workshop (specific to the mint).

It is amazing how much it has progressed from last year - worth using and keeping a watch on how it progresses.

 

Edited January 4 by Sulla80

[NewStyleKing]

I'm not  au fait with this stuff, but what with it make of this description? Will it find the obvious error, or doesn't AI do that kind of thing?

KINGS of PONTOS. Mithradates VI Eupator. Circa 120-63 BC. AR Tetradrachm (30.5mm, 16.70 g, 1h). Pergamon mint. Dated year 205, month 1 BE (October 93 BC). Diademed head right / Pegasos grazing left; star-in-crescent to left; to right, EΣ (year) above monogram; A (month) in exergue; all within Dionysiac wreath of ivy and fruit. Callataÿ p. 10, obv. die D25; HGC 7, 338; DCA 688; SNG BN 792 (same obv. die); Boston MFA 1355 (same obv. die). 

[Svessien]

13 minutes ago, NewStyleKing said:

I'm not  au fait with this stuff, but what with it make of this description? Will it find the obvious error, or doesn't AI do that kind of thing?

KINGS of PONTOS. Mithradates VI Eupator. Circa 120-63 BC. AR Tetradrachm (30.5mm, 16.70 g, 1h). Pergamon mint. Dated year 205, month 1 BE (October 93 BC). Diademed head right / Pegasos grazing left; star-in-crescent to left; to right, EΣ (year) above monogram; A (month) in exergue; all within Dionysiac wreath of ivy and fruit. Callataÿ p. 10, obv. die D25; HGC 7, 338; DCA 688; SNG BN 792 (same obv. die); Boston MFA 1355 (same obv. die). 

I hope you try and find out, and tell us what you found.
I find myself agreeing a lot with @Sulla80 here ( as I often do). My ambition using AI, however, was to get pushback or confirmation on some ideas I have about the coins themes. These are ideas that are not from the traditional litterature. The Pitane coins, for example, have not been studied very deeply, to my knowledge. They have seen a horned deity, and then that has to be Zevs Ammon. Next coin, please! I think quite a lot of work at the British Museum has been boilerplate, as they have had an enormous lot of material to work on. More "important" coins have been studied more deeply, of course. So I think there are still a lot of ideas to work on, on different perspectives of numismatics. AI can be a good sparring partner here, as it has a huge knowledge base, and works on probability. HOWEVER: GPT 4.0 looks like it is programmed to be agreeable, quite unlike the typical numismatist. That is a problem. I wish it was 100% neutral, and not set to support any position. I'm sure this can be improved by working on what prompts you give it though.

[NewStyleKing]

I'll tell when somebody else finds the egregious error!

I always thought that the common consensus was that horned humans eg Alexander, Demetrios,  meant that they had a level of godliness in themselves.Certainly Alexander with Amon after his Egyptian encounter and that Amon= Zeus.

[CPK]

I haven't been at all impressed with what I've seen of AI chatbots/content generators. Everything I've ever seen it spit out has had the same kind of generic, bland, pre-chewed quality. AI is only as smart as the data it is given, so I don't know why everyone seems to expect it to come up with any meaningful new insights on anything.

I also don't like the way AI is being used for art and content creation, which seems fundamentally destructive to the human creative genius. Do any of us want to live in a world where nobody can write a coherent sentence, create a picture, compose a song, etc. without the assistance of AI? I don't. I don't think our culture needs any more dumbing-down than has already taken place.

Alright, rant over. 🙂 

Edited January 4 by CPK

[Sulla80]

2 hours ago, NewStyleKing said:

I'm not  au fait with this stuff, but what with it make of this description? Will it find the obvious error, or doesn't AI do that kind of thing?

KINGS of PONTOS. Mithradates VI Eupator. Circa 120-63 BC. AR Tetradrachm (30.5mm, 16.70 g, 1h). Pergamon mint. Dated year 205, month 1 BE (October 93 BC). Diademed head right / Pegasos grazing left; star-in-crescent to left; to right, EΣ (year) above monogram; A (month) in exergue; all within Dionysiac wreath of ivy and fruit. Callataÿ p. 10, obv. die D25; HGC 7, 338; DCA 688; SNG BN 792 (same obv. die); Boston MFA 1355 (same obv. die). 

It isn't too definitive on errors - here's what it suggests looking at.  The more obscure the information - the less likely it will be in helping your sort out the answers.  If you give it a pdf of Callataÿ to work with it can do a bit more.  

Potential Error: Year and Month Dating

The BE (Bithynian Era) began in 297 BC. To convert year 205 BE to the Common Era:
        297−205=92 BC.
        297−205=92BC.
This would place the coin in 92 BC, not 93 BC, as stated in the description.

Month 1 (A): The first month in the Bithynian calendar might not correspond exactly to October. Ancient calendars often began in the spring (e.g., Nisan in the Seleucid calendar or other regional variations). If the description interprets month 1 (A) as October without proper justification, this could be incorrect.

Mint Attribution: The Pergamon mint is plausible, but ensure the die links and style fit Mithradates VI's coinage from this region and period.
References: Cross-referencing with Callataÿ and other numismatic references should verify whether year 205, month 1 BE matches the coin’s known production date.

"prompt engineering" can often overcome what appear to be hallucination issues / incorrect information - providing appropriate context in the prompt can reduce errors.

 

[Deinomenid]

2 hours ago, NewStyleKing said:

I always thought that the common consensus was that horned humans eg Alexander, Demetrios,  meant that they had a level of godliness in themselves.

Endless debate here rather than consensus. Though I have no idea about Alexander. Or what chatgpt thinks! There’s a strong view  that  they show victory fillets in certain cases.

 

(Images looted long ago from Lamoneta.it)

[Sulla80]

2 hours ago, CPK said:

I also don't like the way AI is being used for art and content creation, which seems fundamentally destructive to the human creative genius. Do any of us want to live in a world where nobody can write a coherent sentence, create a picture, compose a song, etc. without the assistance of AI? I don't. I don't think our culture needs any more dumbing-down than has already taken place.

Alright, rant over. 🙂 

I would respectfully suggest that your rant could apply to any technology from the last 2000 years: I would prefer a well built house to a poorly built one - in differentiating these two, I have a hard time blaming the invention of the electric saw for the poor quality product.  The invention of the printing press made it easier to give human's access to content - it didn't do much to improve what humans were interested in consuming.

[Deinomenid]

22 hours ago, Bannerknight said:

I am a university lecturer, and I see that GPT

7 minutes ago, Sulla80 said:

The invention of the printing press made it easier to give human's access to content

One of Britain’s top lecturers in Greek - though currently more busy caught up in the utter mess of argument over classical education in the UK- has an interesting view here where he sees the naysayers against use of chatgpt (especially in education) as just repeating Socrates’ refusal to write anything down as it makes it too easy to read out knowledge rather than learn it! The claim that somehow reminders  of knowledge rather than knowledge itself are way less worthy... He says the same naysaying was rolled out around the time of the introduction of the printing press, after the birth of internet search and now with AI. And that each time the naysayers were wrong. So far that’s generally been correct.

[NewStyleKing]

@Sulla80

Please tell me why Pergamon mint is plausible? Pergamon was given to the Roman republic by Mad king Attalus lll in 133 BC and it was only incorporated it seems some years later after Aristonicus's revolt masquerading as Eumenes lll came to its end. I can see no way that the Roman province of Asia would mint coinage for a foreign power especially a troublesome one as Eupator was turning out to be.

The Asiatic Vespers where Pergamon threw out the Romans was in 88 BC, then Fimbria retook it chasing Mithradates into the hands of his pirate friends a year or 2 later and remained Roman after that. I cannot see why Al allowed such an error with all its alleged insight and problem solving! I think I don't get Al at all!

 

[NewStyleKing]

@Deinomenid

I think the same argument occurred between 2 Egyptian gods about the birth of writing, one saying writing would destroy memory..or something like it!

[Deinomenid]

Yep! Thoth. He discusses him too in the same way😀

[Svessien]

I think @AncientJoe should come along and post his coin of Alphabet visiting the Greeks. 

[CPK]

1 hour ago, Sulla80 said:

I would respectfully suggest that your rant could apply to any technology from the last 2000 years: I would prefer a well built house to a poorly built one - in differentiating these two, I have a hard time blaming the invention of the electric saw for the poor quality product.  The invention of the printing press made it easier to give human's access to content - it didn't do much to improve what humans were interested in consuming.

I think you missed my point. My criticism of AI’s use as an art or content creator is that it turns AI, not into a tool to be used by a human agent, but into an artificial agent in itself, used to imitate real human skill. An electric saw, printing press, paintbrush, or camera are tools that can be used to create things, but it still takes human knowledge, skill, and expertise to use them well. AI is different. It takes no skill at all on the part of the human to press buttons or type prompts, and I don’t see how widespread use of AI for the arts in this way can result in anything but the stultification of real human talent.

The question I asked in my previous post remains: would you rather live in a world where computer-generated AI is the dominant creator of art, or where human genius is the creator? I don’t think it is Luddism to prefer the latter.

[Sulla80]

19 minutes ago, CPK said:

IThe question I asked in my previous post remains: would you rather live in a world where computer-generated AI is the dominant creator of art, or where human genius is the creator? I don’t think it is Luddism to prefer the latter.

I do easily agree with you that I prefer the product of human creativity to the work of AI - where we might disagree: does AI have utility for creative humans? I think it does.

Edited January 4 by Sulla80

[Bannerknight]

56 minutes ago, Deinomenid said:

One of Britain’s top lecturers in Greek - though currently more busy caught up in the utter mess of argument over classical education in the UK- has an interesting view here where he sees the naysayers against use of chatgpt (especially in education) as just repeating Socrates’ refusal to write anything down as it makes it too easy to read out knowledge rather than learn it! The claim that somehow reminders  of knowledge rather than knowledge itself are way less worthy... He says the same naysaying was rolled out around the time of the introduction of the printing press, after the birth of internet search and now with AI. And that each time the naysayers were wrong. So far that’s generally been correct.

I am happy that most of my reference works are available in electronic form, most of it searchable. I love books, but I simply don't have an extra room to use as a library. As I said, I use and experiment with AI; my concern as a lecturer is that I find the average student less independent and "bright" than 20 years ago. That may be age distortion speaking of course, but knowledge in your head has its own value compared to knowledge by prompt. I believe it has a value in itself to know that the fall of Rome is commonly dated to 476, and that the last emperor's name was Romulus Augustulus. Without consulting Google or AI.

And then of course we can debate if it was Romulus or Julius Nepos 😉

[Sulla80]

1 hour ago, NewStyleKing said:

@Sulla80

Please tell me why Pergamon mint is plausible? Pergamon was given to the Roman republic by Mad king Attalus lll in 133 BC and it was only incorporated it seems some years later after Aristonicus's revolt masquerading as Eumenes lll came to its end. I can see no way that the Roman province of Asia would mint coinage for a foreign power especially a troublesome one as Eupator was turning out to be.

The Asiatic Vespers where Pergamon threw out the Romans was in 88 BC, then Fimbria retook it chasing Mithradates into the hands of his pirate friends a year or 2 later and remained Roman after that. I cannot see why Al allowed such an error with all its alleged insight and problem solving! I think I don't get Al at all!

 

ChatGPT clearly it didn't recognize the flaw in the timing. I don't have access to ChatGPT 4o! which claims "advanced reasoning" - would be curious to know if it does any better.