It's not a belief or logically derived claim, it's as close to empirical fact as we're going to get. We have zero evidence that intelligence without physical ex

It's not a belief or logically derived claim, it's as close to empirical fact as we're going to get. We have zero evidence that intelligence without physical experimentation is possible because we have no other examples of intelligence except humans (and nonhuman animals), all of whom learned experimentally with a physical feedback loop. Even the most extreme cases like Helen Keller depended on it - her story is perhaps far more useful to grounding theories about AGI than any philosophical text as Wittgenstein himself would likely argue (Water!). His contempt, for lack of a better word, for philosophy on those terms is clear. I'm excited to see how LLMs scale but it won't reach AGI without a much richer architecture that is capable of experimentation, capable of playing "language games" with other humans and remembering what it learned. (I'm fairly certain of my views given my experience in neuroscience but it's fun to talk Wittgenstein in the context of LLMs, something that's been conspicuously missing. Sadly I don't believe discussions of AGI are fruitful, just what LLMs can teach us about the nature of language)