It's funny, because AI companies are currently spending fortunes on mathematicians, physicists, chemists, software engineers, etc. to create good training data.
Maybe this money would be better spent on creating a Lenat-style ontology, but I guess we'll never know.
We may. LLMs are capable, even arguably at times inventive, but lack the ability to test against ground truth; ontological reasoners can never exceed the implications of the ground truth they're given, but within that scope reason perfectly. These seem like obviously complementary strengths.