I've done this excercise dozens of times because people keep saying it, but I can't find an example where this is true. I wish it was. I'd be solving world problems with novel solutions right now.
People make a common mistake by conflating "solving problems with novel surface features" with "reasoning outside training data." This is exactly the kind of binary thinking I mentioned earlier.
"Solving novel problems" does not mean "solving world problems that even humans are unable to solve", it simply means solving problems that are "novel" compared to what's in the training data.
Can you reason? Yes? Then why haven't you cured cancer? Let's not have double standards.
I think that "solving world problems with novel solutions" is a strawman for an ability to reason well. We cannot solve world problems with reasoning, because pure reasoning has no relation to reality. We lack data and models about the world to confirm and deny our hypotheses about the world. That is why the empirical sciences do experiments instead of sit in an armchair and mull all day.
People make a common mistake by conflating "solving problems with novel surface features" with "reasoning outside training data." This is exactly the kind of binary thinking I mentioned earlier.