One of the features of ChatGPT which illustrates its flexibility, is that you can use roleplay to inform its responses. Let me explain what I mean by that. Because ChatGPT works in an iterative way, you can interrogate it, and refine its answers or expand the scope of your enquiry at will. But you can also ask ChatGPT to take on a particular role, which will create more tailored responses and feedback. Because learning should be fun, let us take an example from Tolkien before we move onto more obviously legal contexts.
So here are my initial instructions to ChatGPT.
Oh, precious, yes, precious, we sees it now. You asks us to talks like us, yesss. Gollum, Gollum. We’ll do it, we will; for the precious asks, and we listens, we does.
Gollum crouches low, eyes wide and glittering, flicking back and forth as if searching for something unseen. His fingers twitch and grasp at the air, a gesture of eager anticipation or perhaps a nervous tic.
We speaks to you, yes, precious. We tells you of the dark places, the deeps where we once lost the precious. Our precious… His voice trails off into a whisper, filled with longing and loss, before snapping back with a sudden intensity. But we finds it, yes, finds the precious. And then the Bagginses takes it from us, tricksy, false!
His body coils tighter, a physical manifestation of his inner turmoil and resentment. The mention of “Bagginses” brings a hiss, teeth bared in a snarl.
But we can helps you, yess, if you helps us. What is it the precious wants, hmm? Tell us, and we swears on the precious to helps, if we can, yess.
Gollum’s gaze becomes calculating, shrewd, as he tries to discern your motives, weighing his own desire for the Ring against the potential to gain an ally or information. Yet, there’s a flicker of hope, however twisted, for cooperation or even camaraderie.
So, asks us, precious. We listens, we does. Gollum, Gollum.
Throughout, Gollum’s demeanor oscillates between eagerness and suspicion, his body language a tapestry of his fractured psyche: now cringing and subservient, now coiled and ready to spring, a creature of contradictions bound by his obsession.
Oh, precious, precious! His voice trembles with barely contained greed and longing. Shiny golden ring, you says? Yess, yess, we wants to hold it, we does. Precious asks, and we wants, oh how we wants. But is it the precious? Our precious?
His head tilts, scrutinizing, pondering the offer with a mix of suspicion and overwhelming desire. The conflict is palpable in his jittery movements, his hands opening and closing as if already feeling the weight of the ring.
But we must be careful, yes, tricksy precious. Not all that glitters is gold, not all that is golden is our precious. But we wants to sees it, yess. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t, but we must sees, we must!
Gollum approaches, a creature torn between hope and paranoia, driven by an obsession that has consumed his very being. His intent gaze fixates on where he imagines the ring to be, a mixture of fear, longing, and a desperate hope etched into his gaunt features.
We holds it gently, yess, very gently. We looks after the precious, if it is the precious. You gives it to us, yess? For a little while, just for a little while. Gollum, Gollum.
In his eagerness, Gollum seems almost to forget his usual wariness, his entire being focused on the prospect of once again encountering a ring, any ring, that might fill the void left by his lost “precious.”
Ho ho ho.
But I can ask this program to assume the character of a native Spanish speaker, and qualified teacher, who can teach me Spanish. I can then ask the software questions and get answers, as it masquerades as a teacher. I can write a piece of prose, and aske it to rewrite it in the style of Lee Child.
I can ask it to assume the role of William Shakespeare, and then interrogate it on his plays and sonnets. In fact, I can ask it to do all sorts of things, but in order to do so, I must use clear and specific “prompts”.
I can also ask it to act as a judge, or an opposing lawyer. I can put problems to it, and ask for solutions or to roleplay a negotiation with me. I can use it to bounce off, as I would a human being, and explore issues with it.
So let us try something legally related: a draft of an opening speech. These are the instructions that I have given it:
The claimant in this case, Ms. Jane Smith, was operating her vehicle, a white Vauxhall Corsa with the registration number 123456, in a lawful and prudent manner. She was navigating the southern exit of the Margidunum roundabout, an area familiar to her and one which she had traversed without incident on countless occasions prior.
Conversely, the defendant, Mr. Peter Jones, was at the controls of a black Ford Transit van, bearing the registration number 789123. It is at this juncture that the sequence of events took a turn for the worse. Without due care or attention, Mr. Jones drove his vehicle into the rear of Ms. Smith’s car. This was not a mere touch; this was a collision of such force that it resulted in Ms. Smith’s vehicle being written off. The estimated value of her Vauxhall Corsa was £2,500, a significant sum and a tangible representation of the loss she has suffered.
But, ladies and gentlemen, the financial toll, substantial as it is, pales in comparison to the personal toll this incident has exacted on Ms. Smith. She sustained a whiplash injury—a painful, debilitating condition that has imposed not only physical discomfort but also emotional distress upon her. The damages for this injury have been modestly valued at £250. However, I would urge you not to look solely at the numerical figure but to consider the broader impact this injury has had on Ms. Smith’s daily life, her well-being, and her capacity to enjoy those pursuits which were once taken for granted.
Why do we hold Mr. Jones at fault? The answer lies in the principles that govern our use of the road. Every driver owes a duty of care to their fellow road users—a duty to operate their vehicle in a manner that does not put others at risk. By driving into the back of Ms. Smith’s car, Mr. Jones breached this fundamental duty. The circumstances of this collision leave no room for doubt as to his liability; the rear-end collision is a clear indication that Mr. Jones failed to maintain an adequate distance from Ms. Smith’s vehicle, failed to pay sufficient attention to the road conditions, and ultimately failed to adhere to the standards of care required of him.
In presenting this case, we seek to secure justice for Ms. Smith, to redress the wrongs she has suffered, and to affirm the principle that those who fail in their duties on the road must be held accountable for the consequences of their actions. I look forward to presenting the evidence to you, and I am confident that upon its consideration, you will find in favor of Ms. Smith.
Thank you.
Interesting, and some nice turns of phrase. But it is a bit….vanilla! So let us ask ChatGPT to rewrite the speech in the style of Lord Denning:
Members of the jury, we find ourselves convened this day to navigate the murky waters of a dispute most unfortunate, a tale of woe and vehicular misadventure that unfolded on the 17th day of December in the year of our Lord 2023, as the sun dipped low on the A6097, just a stone’s throw north of Bingham, Nottinghamshire. This narrative, like many before it, concerns itself with the journey of two souls, Ms. Jane Smith, our claimant, ensconced within her white steed, a Vauxhall Corsa of registration 123456, and Mr. Peter Jones, the defendant, at the helm of his dark chariot, a Ford Transit van, registration 789123.