The LLM Reasoning Debate on X: Sceptics and Boosters Argue Without Reading
dioscuri · x · 2026-09-16
A philosopher mocks the recurring "LLMs can't reason" debates on X: sceptics deny real reasoning, boosters fire back with demos, and both sides slide into arguing about what "real" reasoning requires—without having read any cognitive science or philosophy of mind. The original poster isn't discouraging the discussion, just noting these are genuinely hard problems with an existing literature worth consulting.
More from AGI Musings
- 1,300 H200s + automated labs: Fedus's Neon model beats GPT-6 Astra on materials benchmark — giffmana · 2026-09-16
- The real RSI bar: when "nontechnical" becomes an aura term in SF — infoxiao · 2026-09-16
- Math's loudest AI skeptic Daniel Litt now expects to lose his 2030 bet — ziv_ravid · 2026-09-16
- Carissa Véliz: the question isn't how dangerous AI is, but the people building it — CarissaVeliz · 2026-09-16
- Philosopher Carissa Veliz: don't let tech executives set the AI agenda — CarissaVeliz · 2026-09-16
- STEM exodus to industry may push universities back to a pre-industrial form — begusgasper · 2026-09-16