Here is why I think Gibson could in principle still be right (without necessarily summoning religious feelings)
[if we disregard that he said "concepts are key" -- though we can be yet more charitable and assume that he doesn't accept (median) human-level intelligence as the final boss]
Para-doxxing ">" Under-standing
(I haven't thought this through, just vibe-calculating, as it were, having pondered the necessity of concrete particulars for a split-second)
(More on that "sophistiKated" aspect of "projeKtion": turns out not to be as idiosynKratic as I'd presumed, but I traded bandwidth for immediacy here, so I'll let GP explain why that's interesting, if he indeed finds it is :)
Wolfram (selfstyled heir to Leibniz/Galois) seems to be serving himself a fronthanded compliment:
