I think it's hard to deny that it's doing some level of reasoning. It's quite clear that these models do not merely echo elements of their training data and that they can solve simple and novel puzzles.
What that reasoning is, exactly, is hard to know. One can suppose that ideas like "glass", "transparent", "mirror" are all reasonable concepts that show up in the training set and are demonstrated thoroughly
What that reasoning is, exactly, is hard to know. One can suppose that ideas like "glass", "transparent", "mirror" are all reasonable concepts that show up in the training set and are demonstrated thoroughly