Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep asking the same question, and I think the steelman version would be "has metacognitive patterns similar to humans"
I think the anthropomorphic view of this is dangerous in the long term as it starts the argument that anything that isn't reasoned by a human isn't reasoning at all. This just changes the argument from LLMs can reason like a human to LLMs can't reason at all while ignoring the third possibility of "LLMs can reason not like a human". One of the biggest things I've learned after the event of LLMs is that humans definit…
> possibility of "LLMs can reason not like a human"
what would be the difference between not reasoning and reasoning not like a human?