> Although, if we suppose intelligence can’t even be defined, then I don’t see how the question is even meaningful in the first place. No one is really saying

> Although, if we suppose intelligence can’t even be defined, then I don’t see how the question is even meaningful in the first place. No one is really saying that it can't be defined, just that it hasn't been defined yet. Until this latest round of LLMs basically flushed the Turing test down the drain, no one but ivory tower philosophers had cared about a rigorous definition of intelligence and without something akin to LLMs to experimentally ground their theories in language (like Wittgenstein's work), several thousand years of philosophy on the topic is pretty much useless to us now.