> The question of whether they reason is meaningless. I'd disagree. Reason is the most reliable way we currently have of drawing conclusions (fewest false nega

> The question of whether they reason is meaningless. I'd disagree. Reason is the most reliable way we currently have of drawing conclusions (fewest false negatives, at least), so if we want to build AI that can draw similarly strong conclusions, it could be useful for them to reason. It also helps to reframe our ideas of what they're doing - i.e., don't call it "reasoning" if it's not actually that reliable, because it builds a false trust in their conclusions. And last - epistemologically, is there a connection between what LRMs are doing now and actual reasoning? Is it possible to smoothly transition from one to the other? Exploring different types of cognition and the connections between them mathematically is pretty damn interesting