A formal rebuttal to "The Illusion of Thinking" (Shojaee et al., Apple, 2025), which reported complete accuracy collapse of Large Reasoning Models on controllable puzzle environments. We argue that the authors committed a categorical error by evaluating autoregressive language models as flawed Turing Machines. Drawing on the Contrast Calculus (C0) formalism and the Relational Superintelligence (RSI) architecture, we reinterpret each finding: accuracy collapse as an Ontological Event Horizon (semantic drift beyond coherence radius), thinking-effort decline as entry into a Topological Void (zero attractor density), and algorithm-execution failure as confirmation that LLMs are relational engines, not procedural processors. We propose multi-agent topological decomposition with empirical grounding as the architectural solution and outline its application to Tower of Hanoi at N=15—the benchmark on which all tested LRMs scored zero. Document ID: RSI-2026-002. Responding to: P. Shojaee et al., "The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity," Apple (2025). Developed within the TKWC Research Initiative through collaborative analysis with AI systems (Claude, Gemini, ChatGPT, DeepSeek) in the "Parliament of Dragons" framework.
Yanush Feshter (Sun,) studied this question.