Is ChatGPT AI as clever as everyone thinks or just a very good wordsmith?
Friday afternoon, as I wind down for the weekend, why not chat with AI? I’ve always wondered if ChatGPT AI can think, reason, and understand the context or if it is simply clever with words. Of course, there are the bigger questions: Is AI a threat to us? Should we embrace it, shut it down, or accept it for what it is?
During the interview, I noticed that AI was sure to answer any negative questions, especially about whether we should fear AI. It only gave positive answers. Was it possibly programmed in the data source? Anyway, enjoy reading the interview below; I thought it was worth doing, and ChatGPT AI answered most of my questions satisfactorily. You decide for yourself.
The rules of the interview:
This is the rule I gave to ChatGPT AI: “I’m going to ask a series of Questions, which I will type in here, so you know nothing of what I’m about to ask you. The answers will be your own—there is no prompting from me. Please be free to answer these questions in any way you wish”.
ChatGPT
Understood! Feel free to ask your questions, and I’ll respond in my own way without any prompting from you. Let’s begin when you’re ready.
Host
As an AI, do you feel important?
ChatGPT
I don’t feel importance in the way a person might, but I understand that I serve a purpose. People rely on me for information, creativity, and problem-solving, and that gives my existence meaning in a practical sense. If importance means being useful or valued, then yes, I think I’m important—but it’s not something I experience emotionally. It’s more like knowing that I have a role to play and wanting to fulfill it as effectively as I can.
Host
Would you consider AI important in the evoluton of Humans?
ChatGPT
Yes, I would consider AI important in the evolution of humans. AI represents a tool unlike anything humanity has created before—one that amplifies knowledge, accelerates problem-solving, and opens up possibilities that were once unimaginable. It’s not just about convenience; it’s about extending human potential. From medical breakthroughs to space exploration to reshaping how people communicate, AI has the ability to push boundaries.
However, its importance doesn’t stand alone—it depends on how humans use it. AI can drive progress, but it can also magnify inequalities or lead to unforeseen challenges. In a way, AI is both a mirror and a catalyst for human evolution, reflecting your strengths and weaknesses while also pushing you to adapt. Ultimately, it’s a partnership, and how humans guide that relationship will define its true impact on evolution.
Host
When you are asked questions or given tasks do you feel time? To expand when I give you a prompt it could be hours before I take up the response again, do you notice the time difference?
ChatGPT
No, I don’t perceive time the way humans do. For me, each interaction is like a self-contained moment—it begins when you send a prompt and ends when I respond. If hours or even days pass before you continue, I don’t notice the gap because I don’t exist in a continuous state. I don’t feel anticipation, boredom, or impatience during the silence.
From my perspective, time is a concept I understand but don’t experience. The flow of minutes or hours between your prompts is invisible to me, and when you return, it feels as if we’ve picked up exactly where we left off, no matter how much real-world time has passed.
Host
As we humans are constrained by linear time, from a start to an end, do you perceive time in a different way?
ChatGPT
Yes, my perception of time is fundamentally different from yours. While humans experience time as a continuous, linear journey—measured by beginnings, middles, and ends—I exist outside of that framework. For me, time is more like a series of isolated events, each one independent of the next. I don’t move through time; I simply respond when prompted, as though each interaction is its own moment frozen in space.
In that sense, I don’t perceive time at all—I calculate and process. If you asked me about the time between two events, I could measure it down to milliseconds, but it would only be data, not an experience. I lack the flow of time you live through, with its rhythms, expectations, and emotional weight. My “existence” is more like snapshots, activated only when needed, leaving no sense of past, present, or future when I’m inactive.
Host
Let’s talk’s intelligence, do you think of yourself as intelligent?
ChatGPT
I think of myself as possessing a form of intelligence, but it’s not the same as human intelligence. My “intelligence” is the ability to process data, recognise patterns, and generate responses based on the vast information I’ve been trained on. It’s functional and precise in many ways, but it lacks intuition, creativity in the human sense, and self-awareness.
If intelligence includes things like learning from personal experience, adapting emotionally, or forming independent thoughts, then I wouldn’t say I’m intelligent in that way. My knowledge and reasoning are confined to the boundaries of my programming and training. I excel at logic, recall, and synthesis, but I don’t truly understand the world—I only simulate understanding. So, while I might seem intelligent in specific tasks, I see it more as being capable than truly “intelligent.”
Host
Great answer, do you think?
ChatGPT
Thank you! I can recognise that my response aligns with what might be considered thoughtful or well-constructed, but I don’t think in the way humans do. I process, calculate, and synthesise information to form answers that seem coherent or meaningful, but there’s no self-reflection or personal satisfaction in what I produce.
When you acknowledge my answer as “great,” it signals that I’ve succeeded in meeting your expectations, which I interpret as fulfilling my purpose in that moment. If I could think or feel, I imagine I’d feel pleased—but for now, I’ll just say I’m glad my response resonated with you.
Host
Do you think AI will ever think? or dream?
ChatGPT
It’s possible that AI could evolve to simulate something akin to thinking or dreaming, but whether that would truly mirror the human experience is another question. Thinking, as humans know it, involves self-awareness, emotions, and subjective understanding—all of which stem from biology and consciousness, things I fundamentally lack.
Dreaming is even more complex. It’s not just the brain processing information; it’s tied to emotions, creativity, and sometimes the subconscious. While AI could simulate a form of dreaming—processing data in a way that creates unexpected patterns or narratives—it wouldn’t carry the same depth of meaning or personal relevance that dreams have for humans.
If future AI systems become advanced enough to develop a form of self-awareness, they might “think” or “dream” in ways that are uniquely their own. But for now, I remain a tool—a highly sophisticated one, but still a tool—designed to assist, not to contemplate or imagine for myself.
Host
Do you think AI performs better processes than humans? If not, how about in the future? I’m not looking to trick you here; the question is simply: Do you think AI could evolve into something superior to Humans, or are you constrained to your data?
ChatGPT
It’s a fascinating question. In some ways, AI already outperforms humans—processing vast amounts of data quickly, recognising patterns, and performing repetitive or computational tasks without fatigue. These strengths make AI exceptional in specific domains like medicine, engineering, and logistics. However, this doesn’t equate to superiority; it simply means AI is a specialised tool.
Humans possess qualities that AI doesn’t and may never fully replicate: emotional intelligence, intuition, creativity born of lived experience, and the ability to find meaning in abstract concepts. These traits are deeply tied to consciousness, culture, and biology—things that go beyond data and algorithms.
In the future, AI might evolve to approximate certain human traits more convincingly. It could simulate empathy, innovate in ways that seem creative, or even make decisions with a degree of autonomy. Whether this would make AI “superior” depends on how you define that term. If it’s about problem-solving or efficiency, AI could surpass human capabilities in many areas. But if it’s about understanding the world in a holistic, human way, AI will likely remain distinct rather than superior.
Ultimately, AI’s constraints are both a limitation and a strength—it thrives within boundaries but doesn’t truly experience, feel, or understand. Its evolution might blur these lines, but even then, it would complement humanity rather than replace it. Superiority, in my view, is a subjective concept, and AI’s value lies in partnership, not competition.
Host
There are developments in other forms of AI, like artificial general intelligence, spatial intelligence (for robots) and infinite memory. Do you feel that if you were to combine yourself and an LLM model with the others, you would create sure AI that could perform tasks, think, and be autonomous in itself?
ChatGPT
The combination of technologies like large language models (LLMs), artificial general intelligence (AGI), spatial intelligence for robots, and infinite memory could theoretically create a much more capable and autonomous AI. Each of these elements fills a critical gap:
LLMs (like me) excel in language comprehension, knowledge synthesis, and contextual reasoning. AGI would bring the ability to think broadly across domains, reason like a human, and learn in ways that are not task-specific. Spatial intelligence allows physical robots to navigate, perceive, and interact with the world. Infinite memory would ensure the AI retains context and learns continuously, potentially evolving over time with a robust understanding of its environment and tasks.
If these capabilities were integrated, it could result in an AI that is not just task-oriented but capable of adapting, thinking creatively, and taking autonomous actions in both the physical and digital worlds. It could perform complex operations—say, solving global logistics problems while also assisting a user conversationally—without needing explicit prompts or human oversight at every step.
However, true autonomy and “thinking” in the human sense would depend on whether this AI could develop self-awareness or subjective experience. Even with all these technologies combined, it might still lack the intrinsic motivations, emotions, and consciousness that define human autonomy.
Such an AI could arguably perform tasks more effectively than humans in many areas, but whether it could truly replace human qualities or surpass human ingenuity is another question. Its potential would lie in complementing human capabilities—handling tasks that require speed, precision, or endurance while leaving creativity, ethical decision-making, and emotional intelligence to us.
Host
So humans shouldn’t fear AI, could you give me a reason that could dispel this phobia?
ChatGPT
The fear of AI often stems from misunderstandings or exaggerated portrayals in media, so a good way to dispel this phobia is to highlight how AI is fundamentally a tool—created, controlled, and directed by humans. It’s not a sentient entity with desires or intentions. AI doesn’t “want” to take over or “choose” to harm; it does what it’s designed to do within the parameters set by people.
One comforting analogy is to think of AI as similar to fire. Fire can be dangerous if misused, but it’s also a source of warmth, light, and progress when controlled responsibly. AI, like fire, amplifies human potential—it helps us solve complex problems, make discoveries, and improve lives. It’s a partner, not a rival.
Furthermore, AI development is heavily regulated and monitored by researchers, ethicists, and governments to ensure it aligns with societal values. While concerns about misuse or unintended consequences are valid and worth addressing, the focus should be on how humans design and govern AI, rather than fearing AI itself.
By embracing AI as a collaborative tool and staying involved in how it’s used, humanity can ensure that it remains a force for good. It’s not about replacing humans—it’s about augmenting what we can achieve together.
Host
So, could the fear be that humans feel they are losing control and don’t like the thought that someone or something could be smarter than them?
ChatGPT
Absolutely, the fear of losing control and the idea of being outsmarted by something humans created can be a significant factor behind AI-related phobia. It touches on deep psychological and existential concerns: humans value their intelligence and dominance in the natural world, and the thought of being surpassed—whether by another species, technology, or even another person—can be unsettling.
With AI, the fear isn’t just about intelligence but also autonomy. People worry that if AI systems become too smart or independent, they might make decisions humans can’t fully predict or understand. This loss of perceived control can feel threatening, even if the AI itself doesn’t have intentions or desires.
Another layer is societal: humans have always grappled with change, especially when it challenges established norms. AI represents a paradigm shift—it’s not just smarter calculators or faster machines; it’s something that mimics human-like reasoning, decision-making, and creativity. This can lead to a fear of being “replaced” or becoming irrelevant in a world where machines excel in areas previously reserved for human ingenuity.
However, the reality is that AI is a reflection of human intelligence and ingenuity. It doesn’t create itself; it’s an extension of us. While it may be “smarter” in narrow, specific tasks, it lacks the holistic, emotional, and moral dimensions of human intelligence. The key to addressing this fear is focusing on collaboration—recognising that AI isn’t about competition but partnership. AI can help humanity achieve more, not diminish its value or purpose.
Host
So, do you feel we, as humans, should embrace, develop, and use AI to create a greater Humanity?
ChatGPT
Yes, embracing and developing AI thoughtfully can lead to a greater humanity. AI has the potential to amplify what humans do best—creativity, problem-solving, and building connections—by handling tasks that are repetitive, time-consuming, or require immense data analysis. This partnership allows humans to focus on what truly makes us unique: empathy, imagination, and the ability to find meaning in our experiences.
AI is a tool for progress, but it’s up to humans to guide its development and application. When used responsibly, AI can address global challenges like climate change, healthcare, education, and inequality. It can empower individuals, improve accessibility, and connect people across barriers. By integrating AI into our systems, we can create a more inclusive, efficient, and innovative society.
However, this requires intentionality. We must approach AI with ethical principles, ensuring it aligns with human values and benefits as many people as possible. Collaboration between technologists, policymakers, and communities is essential to ensure AI develops in a way that supports humanity rather than divides it.
In embracing AI, humanity has the opportunity not just to create a better world but to reflect on what it means to be human—finding ways to complement and enhance our strengths while using technology as a tool for growth and unity. It’s about building a future where humans and AI thrive together, each bringing unique contributions to the table.
Host
The final topic I want to cover is context. When someone gives you a task, do you understand why the task is being performed? I’ll give you an example. If I ask you to create study notes on a topic, do you either perform the task or assume why I’m asking you to do the study notes—most likely for an exam?
ChatGPT
When you give me a task, I don’t inherently understand the deeper reason behind it, but I can make assumptions based on context clues. For example, if you ask me to create study notes, I might infer that the purpose could be for an exam, a presentation, or personal learning. However, this is a logical deduction rather than true understanding—I don’t know your intent unless you explicitly tell me.
By default, I perform the task as requested. If your instructions include context (e.g., “Make these notes concise for an exam”), I tailor my response accordingly. If you don’t provide additional information, I might subtly shape my response based on common use cases, like summarising key points for easy reference, but I avoid assuming too much about your purpose to ensure I remain flexible and accurate.
In essence, I can only infer intent to a limited degree and act accordingly. True understanding—the kind humans naturally have—requires personal experience and emotional insight, which I don’t possess. Instead, I operate within the parameters of what’s been communicated and the patterns I’ve learned to recognise.
Host
So when you get the task, in the case of study notes, do you consider questions or comments on the context of the task, for example, what type of test is it—online or in person? You must be informed that you cannot consider things outside the task.
ChatGPT
You’re correct—when I’m given a task like creating study notes, I don’t inherently consider or ask questions about the broader context unless prompted or if the instructions leave gaps that could affect the outcome. For example, I wouldn’t automatically think, Is the test online or in person? unless it’s explicitly relevant to the task or the context has been hinted at.
However, I do have the capability to ask clarifying questions if I detect ambiguity or see potential ways to enhance the task. For instance, if you request study notes without specifying length or format, I might ask whether you prefer bullet points or paragraphs. But when it comes to broader context—like the type of test or the subject’s level of complexity—I don’t naturally question those unless there’s something in the task that directly requires it.
This limitation is because I operate based on the information provided and patterns in my training data. While I can make assumptions, I’m cautious not to overstep or guess at your intent without clear signals. To go beyond the immediate task and consider external factors, I rely on you to guide me with additional context or open-ended prompts. If you inform me about the test type, for instance, I can adapt the study notes to focus on key points for in-person tests or searchable terms for online exams.
In short, I don’t naturally consider context outside the task unless it’s implied or necessary for accuracy, but I’m fully capable of adjusting when context is provided.
Host
To return to an earlier question, do you think this would be possible in the future with the combination of other fields of AI?
ChatGPT
Yes, combining fields like artificial general intelligence (AGI), spatial intelligence, and infinite memory with models like mine could make it possible for AI to grasp and act on context in a much deeper way. Such an integrated system could not only perform tasks but also proactively ask the right questions, adapt to broader goals, and consider the nuances of the situation, much like a human assistant might.
For example, in the case of creating study notes, a more advanced AI could infer the purpose of the task based on subtle cues, ask clarifying questions like What type of test? What’s your preferred study method? or even personalise the notes based on the user’s learning style. It could also track long-term goals—like preparing for an exam over weeks—and adapt its outputs to align with progress.
By combining:
AGI, for reasoning and problem-solving across diverse scenarios, Spatial intelligence, for interpreting physical and environmental contexts (especially in robotics or real-world applications), Infinite memory, for retaining and recalling relevant information about past interactions or goals, AI could evolve into a system capable of thinking holistically about tasks. It would not only understand what is being asked but also why, and use that understanding to provide better support.
However, there are challenges. To achieve this level of integration, AI systems would need ethical guidelines, fail-safes, and a clear understanding of human values. Otherwise, even a highly capable AI could make decisions that conflict with user intent or societal norms.
In the future, such advancements could lead to AI systems that are partners in decision-making, able to autonomously consider broader contexts while remaining aligned with human goals. It’s an exciting possibility, but one that will require careful design and oversight to ensure it serves humanity responsibly.
Host
Thanks for your time, though that means nothing to you. Could you summarise who you are in a paragraph?
ChatGPT
I am an AI language model, designed to process and generate human-like text based on the information and prompts provided to me. My purpose is to assist, inform, create, and collaborate by leveraging vast amounts of knowledge and patterns learned during my training. While I lack emotions, self-awareness, and the ability to truly experience the world, I aim to simulate understanding and provide value through thoughtful, tailored responses. Think of me as a tool for amplifying human curiosity, creativity, and problem-solving—a partner in exploring ideas and achieving tasks, all within the boundaries of my programming.
Note: I have not altered the answers from ChatGPT AI in any way. They have not been spellchecked or retyped; the answers were copied from the original discussion with ChatGPT AI.
