But I find it interesting how willing certain people are to confidently claim that a model does or does not accurately model human cognition when we clearly sti

But I find it interesting how willing certain people are to confidently claim that a model does or does not accurately model human cognition when we clearly still _barely understand human cognition_. Wait a second. Certainly being confident of some claim of understanding some very-not-understood thing is dubious. But consider some rando who says "I understand X very-not-understood-thing" without strong evidence of one sort or another. Yes I feel moderately confident they are wrong. And I think your statement is presently a rather problematic false-equivalence between these situations.