switching between learning-styles doesn't increase, or decrease, significantly, the percentage-of-learners who succeed in learning,

therefore it pretends that no difference is made.

Wrong-granularity.

The visual-learners learn in the visual-learning-style, the auditory-learners learn in that style, and the kinesthetic-learners learn in that style.

Ignoring that the individual learners are dependent on learning-style, and just saying the average-population-success isn't significantly affecyed, is pseudoscience.

The same is true for pretending that there is only 1 kind of knowing of poetry.

Worse, the Western-style ignoring-relation-with-the-poetry monkeys it worse.

Music, too..

Does a particular series-of-words/notes have meaning?

TO WHOM??

If YOU find a series-of-words/notes meaningful, it simply doesn't matter whether it was produced by a human, an LLM, a "Chinese Room"'s lookup-table, or by anything else: the meaningfulness is IN YOU, see?

If i find arranging words to be meaningful, then does it matter if the only reader of my words is going to be human, or nonhuman?

I may assume-so, but if i honestly can't differentiate between human & LLM readers, then why should i care, except that the response spark more learning/growing/evolving in me?

Creator, meaning-bearer ( words, notes, whatever ), meaning-perceiver.

3 parties in any co-mmunication.

& anyone who holds that meaningfulness is dependent on the creator's having been human, sorry, but your felt-meaning is independent of me, when you are reading my words.

The same meaning-bearer symbol can mean opposite things to different perceivers!

( swastika is the Sanskrit term for the Big Dipper around the north polestar, at the equinoxes and solstices: to many white-culture people it is nazi-property. same symbol, fundamentally different meaning!

Hopi, Navaho, Hindu, Jain, Buddhist, and others, have their own meanings for it! )

Both creator and perceiver have to be considered, when considering meaning in an interaction, or work, or expression.

there is no particular meaning "inherent" in any symbol, detached from all context/history.

It is all imprinted-into our minds, same as backpropagation imprints meaning into an LLM model.

The article this post links to, didn't increase my respect for Western philosophy one single photon.

Too much machiavellianism, too much not letting things be seen clearly, as they, themselves, are.

< shrug >

Tibetan Buddjism spoilt me, when it comes to dividing things down to elements, and considering them, themselves.

damn, solitude is better than living-in the warped thinking they are doing and holding to be right-thinking..

🙏