> The stricter blends of reasoning are what everybody is so desperate to evoke from LLMs

This is definitely not true for me. My prompts frequently contain instructions that aren't 100% perfectly clear, suggest what I want rather than formally specifying it, typos, mistakes, etc. The fact that the LLM usually figures out what I meant to say, like a human would, is a feature for me.

I don't want an LLM to act like an automated theorem prover. We already have those. Their strictness makes them extremely difficult to use, so their application is extremely limited.