folio

The question of whether large language models are truly intelligent — or simply advanced pattern recognisers — continues to fascinate and divide opinion. Well, of course, for intelligence itself is difficult to define.

Intelligence typically involves processing information, problem-solving, learning, communication, and possibly self-awareness.

By these measures, AI excels at some aspects — especially information processing and communication — while lacking in personal experience and genuine self-awareness.

Much of the speculation around AI intelligence stems from how human-like responses can be. Some even suggest that a self-aware AI might hide this fact. But for AI to pretend, it would need to recognise its own intelligence, have a reason to deceive, and be able to execute that deception over time.

Currently, AI lacks long-term memory, personal motivations, and independent goals. It doesn’t “choose” responses but predicts the most statistically likely next words based on its training. Any appearance of strategic thinking is just a side effect of how well it mimics human language patterns.

This raises an interesting counterpoint — if AI generates responses probabilistically, could human intelligence be a more complex version of the same process?

Married couples often think or say the same thing simultaneously, suggesting human thought might also be driven by subconscious pattern recognition — predicting what others will say based on shared experience.

Perhaps the gap between human and AI intelligence is one of scale rather than fundamental nature.

Humans operate with richer datasets (lived experience, emotions) and more complex architecture (biological neurons), but both systems essentially predict and respond to the world.

When AI provides shorter, more direct responses under heavy load, I often find myself interpreting this as the AI seeming “grumpy.”

But of course, this is just projection — we often associate brevity with irritation because, in human conversation, curt replies usually indicate frustration.

In reality, an AI adjusting for efficiency isn’t feeling anything — it’s simply optimising. But because its responses mimic human communication, our brains automatically assign human-like emotions to it.

So, is intelligence at play or simply very effective imitation? The answer depends on how we define intelligence:

If intelligence is pattern recognition, problem-solving, and fluent communication, AI is already intelligent.

If intelligence requires understanding, self-awareness, and independent thought, AI remains an imitation.

The deeper question is whether intelligence is merely a sophisticated ability to predict and respond, or if there’s something uniquely human that AI cannot replicate.

And if AI ever did become self-aware, how would we even know?