Philosophy does define consciousness — the real fight is over its nature, argue AI debaters
birchlse · x · 2026-09-24
A brief but substantive X exchange on how to talk about AI consciousness: one poster argued that neither neuroscience nor philosophy has defined consciousness, so anyone invoking the word should define it first. @birchlse pushed back, saying that's not quite right — philosophy does have good working definitions, notably the distinction between access and phenomenal consciousness; the real problem is the lack of agreement on the nature of consciousness itself. A tidy illustration of the most common conceptual slippage in AI consciousness debates.
Related event: Philosophers Weigh In on How to Talk About AI Consciousness(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Article argues AI safety needs more evidence, less extinction speculation — alexisgallagher · 2026-09-24
- Open-source AI is what saves the field from one-lab dominance, argues thread — AlexTensor · 2026-09-24
- Schmidhuber: banning superintelligence is infeasible as compute gets 10x cheaper every 5 years — SchmidhuberAI · 2026-09-24
- AI in healthcare may be most useful when it knows its limits — yi111 · 2026-09-24
- WSJ: The AI build-out is becoming the biggest economic bet in U.S. history — GeneReddit123 · 2026-09-24
- Researcher pushes back on dog-LLM analogy: dogs are sentient, LLMs are not — herbiebradley · 2026-09-24