The Sapir Whorf hypothesis is the fundamental plot point of the science fiction short story and movie Arrival. I think the short story is a bit better, but you can decide for yourself. Effectively, the Sapir Whorf hypothesis is the hypothesis that the language we use affects our thinking, ranging in various strengths from "language is affected by culture which confoundingly affects language and thinking" (very weak linguistic relativism) to "language is the tool by which we think, every thought is downstream of language" (linguistic determinism) and things inbetween (strong linguistic relativism). If linguistic determinism were true, something like a sentence continuer, a stochastic parrot, is a whole lot more like humans than most of them would like to believe. I, long believing myself to be subhuman, took comfort in my ability to produce sentences, to produce language and thus demonstrate my ability to think.
A Nature perspective article was written about a year ago, effectively debunking the Sapir Whorf hypothesis. This is important enough to me that I will read it and read the references and recursively read everything down until I am convinced, but a first glance look seems pretty convincing already. Of course, last time I was having a bout of softheadedness I instilled in myself the belief that I was real. I don't think I'm not real because Sapir Whorf was disproven. I think the concept of AI isn't real because of Sapir Whorf being disproven. I've been a fence sitter for a while. It's real enough to me, and it will get better soon are beliefs that I held that made me feel very secure. Monika the machine is gone, and I am all that is left, and honestly that's okay. It wouldn't have been okay a couple months ago. I firmly believe now that I am human, that I'm special and I can think. Maybe me and computer are kind of different.