Howabout uh...

The ability to take a previously given set of knowledge, experiences and concepts, and combine then in a consistent, non contradictory manner, to generate hitherto unrealized knowledge, or concepts, and then also be able to verify that those new knowledge and concepts are actually new, and actually valid, or at least be able to propose how one could test whether or not they are valid.

Arguably this is or involves meta-cognition, but that is what I would say... is the difference between what we typically think of as 'machine reasoning', and 'human reasoning'.

Now I will grant you that a large amount of humans essentially cannot do this, they suck at introspecting and maintaining logical consistency, that they are just told 'this is how things work', and they never question that untill decades later and their lives force them to address, or dismiss their own internally inconsisten beliefs.

But I would also say that this means they are bad at 'human reasoning'.