No, you're massively anthropomorphizing them. You can't just add a "loop for rationality"—writing is a second-order product of first-order reasoning. If a model

No, you're massively anthropomorphizing them. You can't just add a "loop for rationality"—writing is a second-order product of first-order reasoning. If a model trained on that second-order product isn't reproducing the first-order behaviour, you can't just tack it on in an extra module. It's like trying to teach something to dance based on the footprints of dancers. Depending on the dance, maybe it'll work and maybe not, but with the dance of reason and the footprints of writing it's not working, and no extra module we tack on will change the relationship between the dance and the footprints. It's a fundamental flaw in the LLM architecture.