No, I did say that animal intelligence has some characteristics. I think I made it clear that metacognition is more optional but I may have written less clearly.

However, I was responding to assertions made specifically about GPT, not some other or future AI.

Other AI systems may be different (I am enthusiastic about Steve Grand’s approach for example) but GPT is not “thinking” by any useful stretch of the word.

I am not placing human intelligence at the pinnacle. I am rebutting the idea that GPT is usefully thinking. It alarms me how many people are willing to strongly suggest it has magical, unknown emergent abilities, when all it can really do is surface embedded logic in the corpus of the written word.