I don't think that LLMs mirror human cognition or "sanity" as much as people want to believe. We are not constantly hallucinating in any way that applies to the term as commonly understood relative to LLMs or to humans. Mistakes, minor psychological changes and emotions aren't equivalent to LLM hallucinations or human psychosis. The relationship is superficial due to both humans and LLMs using natural language. But humans understand that language and its context, whereas LLMs do not.

The narrative exists to justify deskilling and replacing human expertise with LLMs on the premise that LLMs are at worse human equivalent and at best human superior but the hyperbole employed to make the false equivalence sometimes borders on the absurd and occult.

>It wouldn't surprise me if a systematic approach to solve these problems with LLMs could be applied to human/hybrid teams.

What you're describing aren't "problems" that need to be "solved" in human beings. They are problems when they persist in software, but we already had software that didn't have these problems.

This is a state of being that we chose because we decided profit superseded all other concerns.