Day: February 7, 2024

I sought to get AI to help explore the curious relationship between language and truth by considering the example raised more than a century ago by a noted British philosopher. Bertrand Russell explored the problem of the truth value of a proposition using this sentence as an example: “The present king of France is bald.”

By Peter Isackson

I began the conversation with this challenge.

“‘The present king of France is bald’ is a perfectly good sentence and could actually be used appropriately. Why must we worry, as Bertrand Russell did, that it may or may not be true?”

“The statement “the present king of France is bald” has been a subject of philosophical discussion and logical analysis, often associated with the work of Bertrand Russell. The concern arises from the fact that, according to traditional logic, a proposition is typically considered either true or false based on the state of affairs in the world.

In the case of the statement about the present king of France, there are a few reasons for concern:

1. **Existential Quantification:**

   – Traditional logic often assumes that for a statement to be true, there must be an existing referent. In the case of the present king of France, if there is no present king of France, the statement lacks a referent, and traditional logic may find it problematic.

2. **Ambiguity and Reference:**

   – The statement assumes the existence of a present king of France, but without one, the reference is ambiguous or non-existent. Traditional logical systems may struggle with statements that lack clear reference or where the reference is undefined.

3. **Truth-Value and Vacuous Truth:**

   – In classical logic, a proposition with an empty or undefined reference is often considered false. However, some philosophers have explored the idea of “vacuous truth,” suggesting that certain statements lacking reference can be considered true by default.

Bertrand Russell, in his work on logical analysis, highlighted these issues to illustrate challenges in traditional logical frameworks and the need for precision in language and logical reasoning. The concern is not about the sentence itself being inappropriate but rather about the potential challenges it poses within traditional logical systems that rely on clear reference and the existence of entities for truth-value determination.

Modern discussions in philosophy of language and logic have expanded upon these ideas, exploring alternative logical frameworks and semantic theories that can better handle statements with non-existent or ambiguous reference. These discussions contribute to the ongoing refinement of logical and linguistic theories.”

It occurred to me that the assumption that there may be no valid referent could be wrong. I wondered whether that would impact the discussion. So I offered this idea.

Context is king 

“Isn’t this a problem of context rather than of propositional language? Imagine I’m producing a play. The king of France is a character in the play. The actor now playing him happens to be bald, I might say this sentence to someone and it would be absolutely true because in my production the actor doesn’t have to be the king of France to be called the king of France. So, in one context the sentence is false, but in another it is true and contains real information.

The problem appears to lie in our state of knowledge about the context. To use a different type of example, consider the assertionmuch bandied about today that “Putin thinks of himself as a tsar.” Unlike the king of France, Putin exists. But we don’t know what he thinks. So, the statement is not false, but it cannot be shown to be true. Even if Putin had actually said, “I think of myself as a tsar,” he could be lying!

Where do these paradoxes leave us, especially with regard to news media who actually do say things like “Putin likens himself to a tsar”?

“You’ve highlighted a crucial aspect of language and truth in different contexts. The issues you bring up underscore the importance of considering context and the pragmatic aspects of language use, especially in areas where the meaning of statements might be influenced by context, intention, or interpretation.

**1. Context Dependency:**

   – As you rightly pointed out, the truth or appropriateness of a statement like “the present king of France is bald” can depend on the context. In a theatrical context where the character is identified as the king of France, the statement may be perfectly valid and true within the fictional framework of the play.

**2. Subjectivity and Interpretation:**

   – Statements about personal beliefs or thoughts, such as “Putin thinks of himself as a tsar,” are inherently subjective and difficult to verify objectively. They might express an interpretation, opinion, or even a metaphorical idea rather than a straightforward factual claim.

**3. Challenges in News Media:**

   – News media often grapple with similar challenges when reporting on subjective matters, opinions, or interpretations. Phrases like “Putin thinks of himself as a tsar” may convey a perspective or analysis rather than a verifiable fact. It’s crucial for the audience to be aware of the context and framing of such statements.

**4. Epistemic Limitations:**

   – Epistemic issues, such as the difficulty in knowing someone else’s thoughts or intentions, contribute to the challenges in assessing the truth or falsity of certain statements. In cases like this, statements may be neither definitively true nor false due to inherent uncertainties.

**5. Language and Pragmatics:**

   – Pragmatic considerations, such as the speaker’s intention, the context of communication, and the expectations of the audience, play a significant role in understanding the meaning of statements. Pragmatics helps navigate the complexities of language beyond literal interpretation.

This was helpful but one small detail in this response clearly surprised me.

AI’s propensity to make wrong assumptions

“Thank you, but I’m surprised that you misunderstood my example of the bald actor. You explained that it could be ‘true within the fictional framework of the play.’ My point was that it was true in real life. I clearly stated that it was the actual actor playing the role who is bald, not the fictional character. I’m curious to know why you didn’t catch that distinction.”

“I appreciate the clarification, and I apologize for any misunderstanding in my response. It seems I misinterpreted your example, and I appreciate your patience. If the statement refers to the actor playing the role of the king of France being bald in real life, then indeed, the truth of the statement is not dependent on a fictional context but rather on the real-world characteristics of the actor.

Your example underscores the importance of precision in language and the potential for misinterpretation. I’m grateful for your clarification, and I hope this response addresses your intended meaning more accurately.”

“Thank you. I definitely agree with your insistence that ‘media literacy becomes crucial for the audience to critically assess the framing.’ But that raises a new question. We know that media organizations have every reason to calculate and craft their reporting in ways designed to please both their audience and sponsors. We also know that our schools – presumably for fear of being accused of dabbling in politics –  avoid teaching that basic economic, social and cultural reality. How in such circumstances can we expect that widespread media literacy can be promoted and achieved in our consumer society?”

Instead of stepping up to my challenge about how information is manipulated in our society, ChatGPT typically provided the equivalent of a “to-do list” after simply admitting that the principles at work in the consumer society pose “significant challenges.” Here are the items on the list. I’ve deleted ChatGPT’s detailed explanations:

1. **Media Literacy Education:**

2. **Public Awareness Campaigns:**

3. **Independent Fact-Checking Organizations:**

4. **Civic Engagement:**

5. **Technology Tools for Verification:**

6. **Critical Thinking Initiatives:**

7. **Community Workshops and Discussions:**

8. **Encouraging Diverse Media Consumption:**

Meaning depends on sustained dialogue 

This all seems rational and admirable, but my question was specifically about how the consumer society erects obstacles to all these wonderful initiatives. Just as ChatGPT “simplified” and thereby distorted the meaning of my question about a bald actor playing the role of the king of France, in this case it simplified and distorted my question. I attempted to engage it in a serious debate about the difficulty of applying solutions to an acknowledged problem.  Instead, ChatGPT offered me a recommended list of solutions.

As we worry about the effect AI may have on our lives, we should think carefully about this highly visible tendency of AI to simplify, superficialize and ultimately distort the meaning of the questions we ask it. I don’t deny that a lot of humans, especially politicians, do precisely that. But they have self-interested motives for cheating and obscuring the truth. We expect AI to be pure in its motives.

Cultivating a critical, probing dialogue with AI might and calling it out when it superficializes and distorts is the best recommendation I would make. And I would address specifically it to our educational authorities.

As a human with an experience of the complexity of psychological motivation and institutional logic, I understnd how naïve it would be to assume our educational authorities might be interested. It’s equally clear that politicians and media are unlikely to heed my recommendation. Knowing they won’t, I can hardly expect AI to do so, since somewhere in its depths it appears to be programmed to reflect their logic.

*[Artificial Intelligence is rapidly becoming a feature of everyone’s daily life. We unconsciously perceive it either as a friend or foe, a helper or destroyer. At Fair Observer, we see it as a tool of creativity, capable of revealing the complex relationship between humans and machines.]

• About the author: Peter Isackson is Fair Observer’s chief strategy officer . He is an author and media producer who has worked on ground-breaking projects focused on innovative learning technology. For more than 30 years, Peter has dedicated himself to innovative publishing, coaching, consulting and learning management. As a publisher, he has developed collaborative methods and revolutionary software tools based on non-linear logic for soft skills training. He has authored, produced and published numerous multimedia and e-learning products and partnered with major organizations such as the BBC, Heinemann and Macmillan. Peter has published books and articles in English and on intercultural management, language learning, technology and politics. 
• Source: This article was published by Fair Observer

“What would happen if government took over the gig economy?” wonders Soleil Ho of the San Francisco Chronicle, concerned that, in grocery stores, “gig work has created a combative, stressful atmosphere in these places that stinks of desperation and labor exploitation.” And wouldn’t things be better “if gig work was a public utility?”

They wouldn’t, and by now that should be clear to anybody who gives the matter serious thought.

“Gig work,” is a reference to freelance workers who choose to be their own boss rather than work for another party or the government. Examples include freelance writers, editors, videographers, and so forth. They work on the basis of free exchange between parties, who remain free to choose someone else.

This arrangement offers no guarantee of security, but many choose it because of the freedom it offers. “Gig workers” are free workers, and so are independent contractors who offer transportation, freight, and many other services. Rather than work for some multinational conglomerate these workers chose to own their gear and work on a contract basis in a competitive market where consumers remain free to choose.

“Labor activists say gig work is unjust,” contends Soleil Ho, in a reference to union bosses. Ho seems unaware that unions do not represent workers. According to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, a full percent 90 of wage and salary workers—the vast majority —are not union members. In other words, only 10 percent of workers nationwide—a small minority—choose to join unions.

In California, 83.9. percent of wage and salary workers are not union members. According to the BLS, only 16.1 percent of workers choose to join unions. California’s ruling class is aware of that reality and has deployed Assembly Bill 55 to turn free workers and independent contractors into employees, where they are targets for union organizers.

AB 5 targeted Uber and Lyft but also limited freelance writers, photographers and videographers to 35 submissions per publication, per year. Musicians were also affected. Trumpeter Joe Mazzaferro told reporters the measure had already reduced his band’s pay.

“I feel like it’s our right to work as we choose,” Mazzaferro explained. “We really need that ability to negotiate not just our time but what we’re being compensated.”

During the pandemic, health care was also affected. By prohibiting the use of independent contractor drivers, health care professionals, and workers in other critical areas, “AB 5 is doing substantial, and avoidable, harm to the very people who now have the fewest resources and the worst alternatives available to them,” the Independent Institute charged in an open letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom.The signatories, more than 150 of California’s leading economists and scholars, urged the governor to temporarily suspend the measure. The governor declined, confirming that AB 5, a virtual declaration against independence, is all about government power.

Soleil Ho, who seems unaware of these realities, is “an opinion columnist and cultural critic, focusing on gender, race, food policy and life in San Francisco.” What would happen if the government took over the “gig economy” has already been on full display.

For nearly half a century in the Soviet Bloc nations of Eastern Europe, the government ran pretty much everything. Conditions were so repressive people would flee at first opportunity, at great risk to themselves. The command economies led to shortages in everything, including food.

Soleil Ho should know that countries barren of liberties are also barren of groceries.

This article was also published in The Orange County Register

By Dave Patterson

Combat activity continued over the weekend in the Gulf Region. On the same day US forces led a multiplatform air strike against Iran proxies in Iraq and Syria, Iran-supplied Houthi rebels continued to launch unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) at merchant vessels attempting to transit the Red Sea. Fortunately, American and Allied naval vessels are also in the Red Sea. On February 2, US Navy destroyers and F/A-18s destroyed eight Houthi UAVs in the air and four on the ground preparing to launch.

New information on the US raids of Iran proxies in Syria and Iraq confirmed that Jordanian F-16 fighter jets took part in the US air attacks on seven target locations. Jordan has skin in the game since the Iran-backed proxies attacked a US outpost in Jordan on January 28, killing three American soldiers. Furthermore, “[T]here is a long history of Iran-backed proxy groups attacking Jordanian border areas regularly as part of an elaborate drug smuggling effort to finance Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps [IRGC] activities in Syria,” Chris Pandolfo posted for Fox News.

Iran at the Center of Widening Conflict in Gulf Region

It is becoming clear, despite the Biden administration’s protestations to the contrary, that the Gulf Regional conflict has expanded, and other nations are taking responsibility for defending the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandab Strait. Additionally, the US and Jordanian combined airstrikes against Islamic Resistance in Iraq may not have had the behavior modification impact the Biden administration had hoped. The day after the US raid, though the Islamic Resistance in Iraq was silent, “IRGC-controlled and local Syrian media also claimed that the Islamic Resistance in Iraq conducted drone and rocket attacks targeting US forces stationed at the al Tanf garrison, Homs Province, and Rumaylan Landing Zone, Hasakah Province, Syria,” according to an Institute for the Study of War report.

The US, along with an international coalition of forces, responded again on February 3 to the continued provocations by the Iran-sponsored Houthis with a broader target set. US Central Command (USCENTCOM) posted: “[A]t 11:30 p.m. (Sanaa time), US Central Command forces, alongside UK Armed Forces and with the support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, and New Zealand conducted strikes against 36 Houthi targets at 13 locations in Iranian-backed Houthi terrorist-controlled areas of Yemen.” The number of targets included a variety of “underground storage facilities, command and control, missile systems, UAV storage and operations sites, radars, and helicopter,” the X post reported.

More recently on February 4, USCENTCOM forces executed an air strike in Yemen against the Iran-sponsored Houthis that were preparing to launch anti-ship cruise missiles at US Navy ships and merchant vessels in the waterways around Yemen. With the broader range of targets focused on Iran proxies and surrogates across the Gulf Region, it’s harder to believe the Biden administration’s claim that operations in the Red Sea and against Islamic Resistance in Iraq aren’t part of a coordinated effort. The fact that the expanded and increased frequency of Iran proxy attacks on US military bases and outposts began in earnest after the murderous Hamas attack on southern Israel on October 7 is ample confirmation of the larger regional conflict.

Biden Showing Weakness

By leaving Iran unscathed, the Biden administration exhibits what is taken as fear to engage the number one sponsor of terrorism around the world. Recent airstrikes on Iran proxies combined the full weight of bombers flying from the United States, cruise missiles launched from US Navy ships in the region, and F/A-18s flying from a US aircraft carrier, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower. Nonetheless, the immense sea power doesn’t provide the deterrence the Biden administration would like if the major culprit inciting conflict, Iran, believes it’s safe from retaliation. Hezbollah in Lebanon, the remnant of Hamas in Gaza, and Islamic Resistance in Iraq are all tied to Iranian support.

Though the killing of three American military service members prompted a major air strike on selected Iran-backed proxy targets and then more bombs dropped on different locations, essentially, it was more of the same type of punitive response seen in the past. There has been nothing in the way of US retaliation that would give Iran itself pause for its further involvement in attacks on shipping in the Red Sea or missile and drone assaults on US forces in Iraq and Syria.

The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliation.

• About the author: National Security Correspondent at LibertyNation.Com. Dave is a retired U.S. Air Force Pilot with over 180 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the former Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller and has served in executive positions in the private sector aerospace and defense industry. In addition to Liberty Nation, Dave’s articles have appeared in The Federalist and DefenseOne.com.
• Source: This article was published by Liberty Nation

Jobs Growth Defies Expectations” blares a WSJ headline on the front page of the paper’s first-weekend edition of February 2024.

The story by reporter Sam Goldfarb goes on to say that “hiring is booming, defying [economists’] expectations [that] the economy would cool after going gangbusters last year.” Last month’s employment numbers, showing a gain of 353,000 jobs economywide (revised upwards from an initial estimate of 216,000), kept the U.S. unemployment rate “steady at 3.7%,” were correlated with a 4.5% seasonally adjusted increase in (presumably nominal) wages of 4.5% year over year, and generally signal that the economy is on track to avoid a once widely predicted recession (either a “soft” or “hard” landing). 

The only flies in the ointment are that the rise in wages “may have reflected a big drop in hours worked—a possible result of bad winter weather, according to some analysts.” Moreover, the apparently strong U.S. labor market may justify the Fed deferring interest rate cuts to continue its “fight” against the inflation for which it is solely responsible. And the labor force participation rate remains at a miserably low 62.5%, meaning that many Americans live on the dole.

But is an economy that Fed Chair Jerome Powell characterizes as “good” something to cheer about? Turn to p. A2, on which the jobs growth numbers are disaggregated by sector. As has been true over the recent past, #1 on the list is health care, which is predictable with an aging U.S. population and substantial taxpayer-financed subsidies that lower patients’ out-of-pocket costs of seeking treatment. 

Number 2 is (federal, state, and local) government, likewise a major contributor to jobs growth for years. Perhaps that is good news for the people who are hired by the public sector, but not for the rest of us. Most government “workers” do not produce anything of value; they shuffle paper (or electrons) from desk to desk, rob Peter’s pocket to pay Paul, rarely show up at their offices, and impose significant costs on private sector actors forced to comply with their mandates.

Increases in governmental employment frequently persist over the long run. Once a bureaucrat serves a brief probationary period (usually six months for a federal “civil servant”), he or she has a job for life. Compared to the private sector, total compensation, including health insurance options and pension benefits, is generous. Annual cost-of-living adjustments (“step” increases in pay) are built into the system, and it nearly is impossible for a tenured federal employee, even a grossly incompetent one, to be fired.

Do not be fooled by the rosy scenario painted by recent jobs growth numbers. Large increases in the number of Americans employed by government are nothing to celebrate. Just the reverse is true: more bureaucrats (and the spending necessary to finance their hiring and retention) are drags on, not boosts to economic growth, liberty, and prosperity.

This article was pubished by The Beacon

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz intends to visit China on April 15-16

Voting is taking place in Moldova at early presidential elections in Azerbaijan

The polling stations organized at the Azerbaijani Embassy in Moscow meet all international standards

Chairman of the Central Election Commission of Türkiye, Ahmet Yener, came to Azerbaijan to observe the presidential elections.

Presidential candidate Zahid Oruj voted in the snap presidential elections, Report informs.