These situations are novel. Lax terminology is fine when it has no impact on the intuitions, clarity and conclucions of discussion.

If this was a conversation just about outcomes, then whether models think or simulate thinking is sophistry. However, the bulk of the issue here is attributing responsibility, which relies on being clear about the underlying processes at play.

We are hard wired to assume certain priors and capabilites when it comes to "human like" behavior. Anthropomorphizing LLMs implies mechanisms that aren't present, and end up distorting/complicating discussion about the process.

It isn't helped that the frontier labs, the experts in the room, generally use anthropomorphic terms to discuss model capability.