The fundamental concept behind LLMs is to allow the model to autonomously deduce concepts, rather than explicitly engineering solutions into the system.
The self-reflection part is probably true, but that’s not strictly necessary to understand concepts
> what concepts are
How do you know concepts aren’t just statistics?
You're essentially requesting the goalpost be moved.
The cognitive tests we rely on (turing test, chinese room etc etc ) are woefully outdated and inadequate for our time
The goalposts will always be moved btw, because our experience of intelligence is subjective and we 'll never have an objective measure of it. At some point we will stop moving them because we ve ran out of ideas. At that point we can say we have a facsimile of our intelligence
However:
> but clearly dont have a model of the world, self, or others because they have not been engineered in
Neither did we.
> The hypothesis that, by scaling the giant clockwork, these things will magically emerge is .. magical and unproven.
Our sapience was and is an emergent phenomenon, (superstition aside) was that magic?
The great thing for cognitice scientists /linguists is that we now have a quantitative, precise framework and no longer need to talk in terms of the folk intelligence science of the past.