> Yes, one could describe the intricacies and complexities of human thought and reasoning as equivalent to prompting a stateless stochastic token matching machi

> Yes, one could describe the intricacies and complexities of human thought and reasoning as equivalent to prompting a stateless stochastic token matching machine but all that proves is how much of a reach the premise is. If you ask me, no you cannot do that even if you know you're stretching the limits of that "abstraction". It just doesn't fly even in the wildest theory. Even if an LLM has a world model that could be compared to a human one, the whole underlying nature of experience is completely missing, hence rendering even this narrow comparison extremely wonky. Otherwise, I like the way you've put it into words though!