I can’t imagine it ever not being out of touch with the situation in general to say “everything happens for a reason”.
I’m not arguing for the bot. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
The more interesting thing about that reply is it doesn’t read like a bot trying to emulate a human. It reads like what it is, a search bot with a little frill. Likely a triggered protocol.
That’s just deists being deists. Unfortunately, there’s nothing to be done about completely competing mindsets effectively solely offering platitudes to one another.
And it’s what google’s LLM offered, way back when “AI” was new and exciting and on the news everywhere, so there might be something to that assessment. I just referenced my very dated memory of a thing I saw like twice.
You and op describe tactless people employing a thought stopping phrase that they are most likely intending to be comforting.
Sometimes intent doesn’t matter at all. Sometimes intent is everything. When you’re making emotional space to grieve with someone, that’s one of the times intent matters more than the words you’re going to say. You will put your foot in your mouth. That’s a reason why I try (big emphasis on try) not to blame people for unusual words or actions when they’re grieving. It’s your presence and your affection, your validation that matter more than specific words.
Sometimes you have to recognize the intent and let the specific words go. If you’re close enough you can explain why so many people hate the phrase, but I wouldn’t expect a receptive audience from any but the closest friends.
I don’t believe it’s tactless, just that it doesn’t serve their understanding of the world to say that it isn’t. Comforting the bereaved is hard and new for most and they feel a lot of hurt about how they were treated, so my pushback was light to keep them engaged. Acknowledging and contextualizing it and then moving through it serves them far better than “no and.”
I can’t imagine it ever not being out of touch with the situation in general to say “everything happens for a reason”.
I’m not arguing for the bot. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
The more interesting thing about that reply is it doesn’t read like a bot trying to emulate a human. It reads like what it is, a search bot with a little frill. Likely a triggered protocol.
That’s just deists being deists. Unfortunately, there’s nothing to be done about completely competing mindsets effectively solely offering platitudes to one another.
And it’s what google’s LLM offered, way back when “AI” was new and exciting and on the news everywhere, so there might be something to that assessment. I just referenced my very dated memory of a thing I saw like twice.
You and op describe tactless people employing a thought stopping phrase that they are most likely intending to be comforting.
Sometimes intent doesn’t matter at all. Sometimes intent is everything. When you’re making emotional space to grieve with someone, that’s one of the times intent matters more than the words you’re going to say. You will put your foot in your mouth. That’s a reason why I try (big emphasis on try) not to blame people for unusual words or actions when they’re grieving. It’s your presence and your affection, your validation that matter more than specific words.
Sometimes you have to recognize the intent and let the specific words go. If you’re close enough you can explain why so many people hate the phrase, but I wouldn’t expect a receptive audience from any but the closest friends.
I don’t believe it’s tactless, just that it doesn’t serve their understanding of the world to say that it isn’t. Comforting the bereaved is hard and new for most and they feel a lot of hurt about how they were treated, so my pushback was light to keep them engaged. Acknowledging and contextualizing it and then moving through it serves them far better than “no and.”
And I was just making fun of llm gaffs.