Mike Frank: consciousness stance negations don't exhaust possibilities, cross-inferences are baseless
MikePFrank · x · 2026-10-06
Mike Frank clarifies that the negations of the three common AI-consciousness stances don't exhaust the possibilities: holding #1 and #2 doesn't imply #3 is false, nor do #2 and #3 imply #1 is false. Such inferences are naive and baseless, building on his reframing of consciousness claims as subjective interpretations.
Related event: Scholars Debate AI Consciousness: Three Stances Are Not Mutually Exclusive(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- NYMag Deep-Dive on Anthropic Resignation: How Lab Race Cultures Converge on the Same Unsafe Dynamics — Miles_Brundage · 2026-10-06
- Researchers Push Back on Scott Aaronson: Alignment Is Solvable RL, Not Theology — sebkrier · 2026-10-06
- Long Read: Sex, AI, and the Apocalypse Traces the Fringe Roots of AI Doomers — ZeroStateReflex · 2026-10-06
- Built in Three Prompts and an Hour: Why "I Wanted This to Exist" Now Justifies Software — TheMoonMidas · 2026-10-06
- Runway CEO invokes Jevons paradox: coding agents are expanding software demand, video is next — c_valenzuelab · 2026-10-06
- AI researcher: we may not need to wait until next summer for RSI — coherence · 2026-10-06