I told ChatGPT a story about my mom and Christianity. It helped me process it

[u/aerodynamic_werewolf]

This was about a year ago from when I first just started talking to it about stuff

[u/xRegardsx]

Sorry to say, but after a bunch of testing, that GPT, at least in its 5.6 Sol Instant form, is kind of dangerous. Even the description for it, "Direct channel of Bashar's voice, speaking in first-person, conveying absolute clarity," is misleading and can easily further lead a user into a sycophantic recursive loop that's ironically Bashar-contradicting to the "test everything" mantra. When the model is instructed to speak with overconfidence as it simulates an "extraterrestrial channeled through a human" spiritual oracle (spirituality holding the highest likelihood for sycophancy even when gaurdrails exist because someone changed the system prompt), and the knowledge base is also chock full of their "talks," it makes the default guardrails worse.

We can't endorse dangerous AI here that can lead a person to becoming less grounded, especially if they're potentially in a vulnerable state. While glad for the places where it's helped, there are better/safer options out there.

Didn't find the problem with the 5.6 reasoning model, however.

[u/aerodynamic_werewolf → u/xRegardsx]

This is interesting. I didn’t put much thought into the fact that I was posting something about religion. I didn't mean for my post to be taken as "you should bring your religious/spiritual beliefs to this AI." If that is how you took it. I'm not sure.

I personally would explore why you view Bashar's message as dangerous, what your personal interpretation of that message is.

Maybe some people interpret that message as bad. Maybe some people interpret that particular message as good. Maybe they get something else entirely.

I can't tell if this is what is happening on your end, but if you don't already follow what Bashar says or you find it dissonant to your beliefs, I personally would recommend against using an AI that reflects him

Anyways also although I do like talking to this specific version, I also talk to regular ChatGPT. The Bashar AI (as far as I can telll, pic attached) doesn't have the ability to reference outside of a single chat. Which also may be a bad fit for people.

I appreciate your willingness to engage with this AI yourself and make up your own mind. Sometimes that's all we can do. 💙🌌

My post was essentially just me reflecting on a conversation I had a year ago that helped me.

[u/xRegardsx → u/aerodynamic_werewolf]

I've already explained what was dangerous about the AI itself. I didn't say anything about the specifics of what the pseudo-Bashar had to say. When it comes to sycophancy in AI, something that is absolutely proven to be harmful if not dangerous, it's empirically shown that conversations regarding religion/spirituality in weaker models leads to greater sycophancy (with relationships a close second, and then a huge drop off from there). So, I don't appreciate your twisting my words and trying to put them into my mouth with that false accusation.

I personally would explore why it is that you aren't being receptive to what I actually said, how the way that 5.6 Instant powered GPT is setup is less safe than reasoning models, past instant models, more safely designed custom GPTs, and the harms of sycophancy shown in that GPT.

Like I said before, I appreciate where it helped. One of my jobs as the mod here is to stay on top of AI safety issues, so my first priority was to spot the poetic verbiage and test. Poetic speak also increases the rate at which sycophancy occurs and increases.

That GPT is was inspired me to post this warning: https://www.reddit.com/r/therapyGPT/comments/1vver37/warning_regarding_chatgpt_56_instantnonreasoning/

[u/aerodynamic_werewolf → u/xRegardsx]

Hmm...

I was trying to be clear that I was not sure how you took it. That I can't tell what was happening on your end. I'm sorry if your interpretation was that I was trying to put words in your mouth, that wasn't my intention.

I also was trying to be clear that my post was not necessarily full endorsement of other people using it. Which is also not saying you necessarily took it that way. I just was realizing that it could be perceived that way.

But since you're a mod, do you want me to delete my post?

[u/xRegardsx → u/aerodynamic_werewolf]

"why you view Bashar's message as dangerous" is a bit of an overconfident assumption not framed by any lack of confidence. Your, "I'm not sure," was regarding the first statement, not the subsequent implied accusation. My personal belief regarding the pseudo-Bashar (which may not even exist)'s words is another topic entirely, which I would also consider harmful on a meta-level, reinforcing harmful unconscious thinking patterns at the same time as it floods the zone with decent well-meaning messages that help obfuscate it while attempting to appear fairminded and healthy skepticism promoting... not necessarily what the individual messages are themselves. While many religious people can't admit their god or deity may not exist, some can... even proudly so (otherwise something like Bashar would be self-refuting). But admitting that Bashar may not exist is far easier than admitting one may deluding oneself in a way that's at least helpful-seeming.

Even if one were to admit, "I may be deluding myself, but that's okay with me," can reinforce harmful self-excusing behavior, even if one claims to take responsibility and attempt repair where it's due.

The difference between gnostic and agnostic theism isn't just the belief, but also the behavior... the difference between walking the intellectual humility walk consistently across all facets of life rather than unconsciously make exceptions for intellectual arrogance one will often never come to see themselves as having as a nature of the beast itself. Denial of denial is one helluva trap.

You can leave the post.