> We don't understand human cognition despite literally thousands of years of thought and study Is this a requirement for achieving AGI? The history of progres

> We don't understand human cognition despite literally thousands of years of thought and study Is this a requirement for achieving AGI? The history of progression of the ML field indicates that the answer is "no". We don't really understand how concepts are encoded in today's models, yet that doesn't stop them from being economically useful. So why would the special case of AGI be any different?