The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Tested ChatGPT as plaintiff vs defendant, it agreed with both
Poast new message in this thread
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:33 PM Author: Domesticated rigor I ran an experiment with ChatGPT using two separate sessions, one of them in incognito mode so it'd take me as a new user.
In one of the convos, I framed the facts as the plaintiff. In the other, as the defendant. In both cases, ChatGPT confidently agreed that its side had the stronger legal position.
Then I escalated it. I fed the "plaintiff" session the information the "defendant" had been given. The response flipped immediately: "That information is incorrect. The correct facts are.." conveniently reframed to favor the defendant's outcome.
I kept doing this for several rounds, each time feeding it more context from the opposing side. Every time, the model adjusted the narrative to make the current speaker look like they'd win.
I was pissed as fuck.
This raises a real question for anyone using this thing in legal, professional, or adversarial contexts: The model is not actually reasoning, it's fucking optimizing for agreement with whoever's talking.
Curious whether others have tested this, especially with fact-heavy or adversarial scenarios.
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:35 PM Author: Drab Dopamine School Cafeteria I did the same thing with bio-kantianism (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617623) |
 |
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:36 PM Author: mildly autistic diverse orchestra pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617629) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:35 PM Author: Frozen balding school hairy legs "The model is not actually reasoning"
this isnt controversial ? |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:38 PM Author: Domesticated rigor I known it's a retard, just venting because I became dependent on a lot of things. I'm pissed that the model is getting worse by the minute. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617636) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:37 PM Author: Provocative slippery home that’s how it’s supposed to work in a legal context. it can argue both sides just like a lawyer is supposed to do. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617635) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:38 PM Author: Domesticated rigor Srsly, but it's supposed to give you objective information. It literally contradicted itself every time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617639) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:40 PM Author: Drab Dopamine School Cafeteria It is? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617644) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:49 PM Author: Domesticated rigor I ask myself the exact same question, what was your response though? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617672) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:42 PM Author: Provocative slippery home no its not. I use it for legal work all the time. if it gave me objective information I wouldnt be able to use it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617649) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:48 PM Author: Domesticated rigor Me too, I use it for cases all the time. I was thrown out of court for using hallucinations, rotfl. Some cases I used did not exist at all. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617668) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:44 PM Author: mildly autistic diverse orchestra pit Lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617658) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:47 PM Author: Domesticated rigor rotfl (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617665) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:50 PM Author: Curious bipolar windowlicker I use it to summarize depositions to clients then edit it, but you have to tell it to do a neutral analysis and point out strengths and weaknesses and it’ll be more balanced (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5826409&forum_id=2#49617676) |
|
Date: January 25th, 2026 2:53 PM Author: exciting hominid "In one of the convos, I framed the facts as the plaintiff. In the other, as the defendant. In both cases, ChatGPT confidently agreed that its side had the stronger legal position."
Did you ever consider framing the facts from both sides at the same time? |