Without a definition of "true understanding" this is meaningless.
Saying they "can't reason logically" is also purely subjective - you out the benchmark much higher than I do, given I've seen ChatGPT provide reasoning at a level many humans fail to reach on a regular basis. This does not mean it's good at it, but that humans reasoning ability is often rather poor.
I see nothing in this other than an argument from them not being good enough now coupled with unsupported implied speculation of what understanding and reasoning and intelligence implies that we have little evidence either for or against.
Saying they "can't reason logically" is also purely subjective - you out the benchmark much higher than I do, given I've seen ChatGPT provide reasoning at a level many humans fail to reach on a regular basis. This does not mean it's good at it, but that humans reasoning ability is often rather poor.
I see nothing in this other than an argument from them not being good enough now coupled with unsupported implied speculation of what understanding and reasoning and intelligence implies that we have little evidence either for or against.
All in all this comes across as blind belief.