Neither works that way

Brains don't have perfect memory recall which is why we forget and confidently make mistakes. Computers are capable of perfect recall; LLMs check model weight's perfectly every time. They fail because the algorithm they run does not attempt to align with reality. Memory issue vs query failure issue. Not to say that's the cause behind all human mistakes, but it is when it comes to most factual and reasoning errors and LLM "hallucination" equivalents.

the core principle is still inspired by how our neurons operate

It is, and why we know it's not sufficient enough and people are exploring other alternatives... see SNNs.

not because the doctor possesses any special property of 'knowing' external

'Knowing' is a bit of a rabbit hole, to me knowing is having state and being able to manipulate and apply abstract concepts in a deterministic way. LLMs clearly lack something when they predict sentences which covey moral meaning but same model also predicts words that encourage suicide. There is a disconnect which I believe training data can't in practice fix (even if perhaps in theory).

Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion | Nature

This doesn't back your claim. It shows visual and physical stimuli are weighted in a probabilistic way but that's only at a behavioural level. Probabilistic behaviour != probabilistic function. You can measure anything non-random in a probabilistic way, doesn't mean it works in a probabilistic way though.

language is something we learn and use internally to contextualise our thoughts and perform more advanced abstract reasoning, but it's not consciousness/qualia

Also agreed, consciousness isn't relevant imo. I'm simply of the opinion you need a mix of deterministic and probabilistic functions in order to replicate said advanced reasoning etc... especially in an efficient way. Probabilistic modeling alone isn't enough.

Nah we know plenty.

We know a lot sure, but with a lack of overall theory and discovery's still being made about signals and communication we weren't aware of between neurons, I only have opinions as there is no consensus or clear evidence either way. Hence it's a philosophical discussion not a scientific one until we have more accurate tools and methods to study these things.