zlacker

>>amrrs+(OP)
Human language is far from perfect as a cognitive tool but still serves us well because it is not foundational. We use it both for communication and some reasoning/planning as a high level layer.

I strongly believe that human language is too weak (vague, inconsistent, not expressive enough etc.) to replace interactions with the world as a basis to build strong cognition.

We're easily fooled by the results of LLM/LRM models because we typically use language fluency and knowledge retrieval as a proxy benchmark for intelligence among our peers.

>>stephc+vz1
Human language is more powerful than its surface syntax or semantics: it carries meaning beyond formal correctness. We often communicate effectively even with grammatically broken sentences, using jokes, metaphors, or emotionally charged expressions. This richness makes language a uniquely human cognitive layer, shaped by context, culture, and shared experience. While it's not foundational in the same way as sensorimotor interaction, it is far more than just a high-level communication tool.