Doesn’t the concept of a subconscious, or inner voice, invalidate any tight analogies to Turing Machines? What logical process is putting the Fur Elise into my head (earworms etc)

I think this article is right that definitions really matter here cause one could argue “CTM is trivial, because we can describe almost any physical system as executing computations.” So we have a dual problem here—not just the difficult discussion of ‘what’s going on in minds’, but also ‘what is computation’.

▲

cat-whisperer 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I would agree, but I recently read https://transformer-circuits.pub/2026/workspace/index.html which is quite interesting in it's own right.

What are your thoughts on this?

▲

firasd 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Are LLMs even covered by ‘computational theory of mind’? Cause if I say “I like to bake” the LLM is only able to recognize and respond to that sentence due to the neural network making emergent connections between the tokens in the words—very different from the kind of computer programs these guys seem to have been thinking about.

	▲	timshell 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think many cognitive scientists think language is a core part of human cognition, and that LLMs were a major advance in AI/cognitive science due to connecting AI algorithms with language production, but LLMs aren’t considered (or even aiming) to be accurate models of human cognition

▲

BobbyTables2 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Wonder if the subconscious could simply be another LLM with a higher temperature setting…

Have long thought that creativity is little more than a finely tuned filter driven by noise…

▲

TheOtherHobbes 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Infuriatingly, computation is subjective. The experience of the inputs, the results, and the processes depends on qualia. So does logic itself.

Automating the processes doesn't change that. There's a very large number of possible processes and operations, but only a small number are perceived as valuable.