Large language models and their big bullshit potential

Newly powerful large language models have burst onto the scene, with applications across a wide range of functions. We can now expect to encounter their outputs at rapidly increasing volumes and frequencies. Some commentators claim that large language models are <i>bullshitting</i>, generating convincing output without regard for the truth. If correct, that would make large language models distinctively dangerous discourse participants. Bullshitters not only undermine the norm of truthfulness (by saying false things) but the normative status of truth itself (by treating it as entirely irrelevant). So, do large language models really bullshit? I argue that they can, in the sense of issuing propositional content in response to fact-seeking prompts, without having first assessed that content for truth or falsity. However, I further argue that they <i>need not</i> bullshit, given appropriate guardrails. So, just as with human speakers, the propensity for a large language model to bullshit depends on its own particular make-up.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ethics and Information Technology
Published
2024-10-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09802-5
Citations
13
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
14.72

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Large language models and their big bullshit potential

Sarah A. Fisher
13 citations
Ethics and Information Technology
Misinformation and Its Impacts
14.72
article

Large language models and their big bullshit potential

Sarah A. Fisher
article en
13 citations

Abstract

Newly powerful large language models have burst onto the scene, with applications across a wide range of functions. We can now expect to encounter their outputs at rapidly increasing volumes and frequencies. Some commentators claim that large language models are <i>bullshitting</i>, generating convincing output without regard for the truth. If correct, that would make large language models distinctively dangerous discourse participants. Bullshitters not only undermine the norm of truthfulness (by saying false things) but the normative status of truth itself (by treating it as entirely irrelevant). So, do large language models really bullshit? I argue that they can, in the sense of issuing propositional content in response to fact-seeking prompts, without having first assessed that content for truth or falsity. However, I further argue that they <i>need not</i> bullshit, given appropriate guardrails. So, just as with human speakers, the propensity for a large language model to bullshit depends on its own particular make-up.

Ethics and Information TechnologyVol. 26(4)
Cardiff University (GB)
UK Research and Innovation, University of Reading
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
14.72
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Large language models and their big bullshit potential — Sarah A. Fisher · Ethics and Information Technology (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS