I'd like to remind people not to cargo cult, and the main issue I see with any attempt at saying an LLM is thinking is that we just don't know how human thinking works.

We now understand pretty well how LLMs "think", and I don't know why we want to call it "thinking" when we mean we know how they work. But to say that their architecture and method of generating language amounts to human thinking? When we know very little of how human thinking works?

Like why are we even trying to make such claims? Is it all grift? Is it just because it helps people understand a little how they work in simplistic terms? Is it because it kind of describes the semblance of behavior you can expect from them?

LLMs do exhibit thinking like behavior, because they were trained to learn to do that, but I think we really need to check ourselves with claim of similarity in thinking.