语言模型作为批判性思维工具：以哲学家为案例的研究
Language Models as Critical Thinking Tools: A Case Study of Philosophers
AI总结：
本文以21位哲学家的访谈为案例，提出自我感-主动性模型解释语言模型在批判性思维中的不足，并构想了对话者、监督者和回应者三种工具角色。
摘要：
当前语言模型（LMs）的研究工作通过加速和自动化认知工作，帮助我们加快甚至跳过思考。但语言模型能否帮助我们进行批判性思维——即以更深入、更具反思性的方式思考，从而挑战假设、澄清观点并构建新概念？我们将哲学作为批判性思维的案例研究，采访了21位专业哲学家，了解他们如何进行批判性思维以及他们使用语言模型的经验。我们发现，哲学家认为语言模型并不有用，因为语言模型缺乏自我感（记忆、信念、一致性）和主动性（好奇心、积极性）。我们提出了用于批判性思维工具的自我感-主动性模型，以刻画这一差距。利用该模型，我们构想了语言模型作为批判性思维工具可以扮演的三种角色：对话者（Interlocutor）、监督者（Monitor）和回应者（Respondent）。我们希望我们的工作能激励语言模型研究者进一步将语言模型发展为批判性思维工具，并启发哲学家及其他“批判性思考者”设想语言模型在智力上的实质性用途。
英文摘要：
Current work in language models (LMs) helps us speed up or even skip thinking by accelerating and automating cognitive work. But can LMs help us with critical thinking -- thinking in deeper, more reflective ways which challenge assumptions, clarify ideas, and engineer new concepts? We treat philosophy as a case study in critical thinking, and interview 21 professional philosophers about how they engage in critical thinking and on their experiences with LMs. We find that philosophers do not find LMs to be useful because they lack a sense of selfhood (memory, beliefs, consistency) and initiative (curiosity, proactivity). We propose the selfhood-initiative model for critical thinking tools to characterize this gap. Using the model, we formulate three roles LMs could play as critical thinking tools: the Interlocutor, the Monitor, and the Respondent. We hope that our work inspires LM researchers to further develop LMs as critical thinking tools and philosophers and other 'critical thinkers' to imagine intellectually substantive uses of LMs.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
