We do it’s fuzzy but we do. You point to a rock all humans say it’s not intelligent. You point to a human all humans say it is intelligent.

Because we can do this, by logic a universally agreed upon definition exists. Otherwise we wouldn’t be able to do this.

Of course the boundaries between what’s not intelligent and what is where things are not as universally agreed upon. Which is what you’re referring to and unlike you I am charitably addressing that nuance rather then saying some surface level bs.

The thing is the people who say the LLM (which obviously exists at this fuzzy categorical boundary) is not intelligent will have logical paradoxes and inconsistencies when they examine there own logic.

The whole thing is actually a vocabulary problem as this boundary line is an arbitrary definition given to a made up word that humans created. But one can still say an LLM is well placed in the category of intelligent not by some majority vote but because that placement is the only one that maintains logical consistency with OTHER entities or things all humans place in the intelligent bucket.

that you're arguing with an LLM :)

he's not.