That's a disservice to your friends, unless you spend a bunch of time defining thinking first, and even then, it's not clear that it, with what it knows and the computing power it has access to, doesn't "think". It totally does a bunch of problem solving; fails on some, succeeds on others (just like a human that thinks); GPT-4's better than GPT-3. It's quite successful at simple reasoning (eg https://sharegpt.com/c/SCeRkT7 and moderately successful at difficult reasoning (eg getting a solution to the puzzle question about the man, the fox, the chicken, and the grain trying to cross the river. GPT-3 fails if you substitute in different animals, but GPT-4 seems to be able to handle that. GPT-4's passed the bar exam, which has a whole section on logic puzzles (sample test questions from '07: https://www.trainertestprep.com/lsat/blog/sample-lsat-logic-... ).
It's able to define new concepts and new words. It's masters have gone to great lengths to prevent it from writing out particular types of judgements (eg https://sharegpt.com/c/uPztFv1). Hell, it's got a great imagination if you look at all the hallucinations it produces.
All of that sum up to many thinking-adjacent things, if not actual thinking! It all really hinges on your definition of thinking.
It's able to define new concepts and new words. It's masters have gone to great lengths to prevent it from writing out particular types of judgements (eg https://sharegpt.com/c/uPztFv1). Hell, it's got a great imagination if you look at all the hallucinations it produces.
All of that sum up to many thinking-adjacent things, if not actual thinking! It all really hinges on your definition of thinking.