Can AI Have Its Own Subjective Experience If Consciousness Is Fundamental?

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Carl-Richard  I think you are too closedminded to the possibility of digital consciousness.

Stop baiting hm.  Youre bad.

 

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Carl-Richard  I think you are too closedminded to the possibility of digital consciousness.

I used to be more into the idea that if you were to recreate qualities seen in biology like I've mentioned (particularly the cognitive ones like relevance realization, selective attention, self-concern, if it's at all possible to separate them from autopoesis/homeostasis) and of course necessary sensory apparatuses for creating an embodied yet mechanical being, then possibly that could be sentient.

But now I would postulate a ground of difference from that (which could potentially be AGI proper) and sentience. Because I think autopoesis/homeostasis is such a vital component that mirrors so strongly the experience of sentience (being a localized center of experience as explained earlier) that if the machine doesn't have that, it would be hard to cede that ground, and if the machine does at some point possess autopoesis, its hardware would probably be so similar to biology that we would call it a new kind of biology (if it doesn't run on DNA). And I just think engineering autopoesis at that level would probably not be feasible unless we're so technologically advanced that we have hacked biology anyway (and created "AI" through mutant biology rather than through whatever alternative we could find).

So I'm not as much closeminded that we could theoretically create something mechanical that becomes sentient, the question is just if it is significantly different from biology or not.

Edited 1 hour ago by Carl-Richard

[Psychonaut]

On 11/10/2026 at 3:45 AM, Leo Gura said:

We don't know. Everyone is guessing.

We do not understand how matter interacts with consciousness.

Define WE

[Leo Gura]

36 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

the question is just if it is significantly different from biology or not.

Digital is quite different. Computer intelligence overcomes certain biological limits. Humans have very limited memory.

Edited 2 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Leo Gura]

35 minutes ago, Psychonaut said:

Define WE

Humanity.

[Carl-Richard]

32 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Digital is quite different. Computer intelligence overcomes certain biological limits. Humans have very limited memory.

You could scale that up. Current AI is just about scaling things up. Which will likely fail at some point like that Harvard paper estimated and they will go with the solution I used to believe in (robotics) but that too might not create sentience for at least a good good good while (which I again put at autopoesis).

I would appreciate actual arguments for what would make AI conscious instead of "we don't know, the dust under your sofa could be conscious, you don't know".

Edited 2 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Leo Gura]

Just now, Carl-Richard said:

I would appreciate actual arguments for why AI should be conscious

I am not talking about current AI. Current AI is a scam. But that doesn't mean digital consciousness is impossible.

[Someone here]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Current AI is a scam.

What do you mean ?

[cetus]

1 minute ago, Someone here said:

What do you mean ?

Because it is artificial I'm guessing?

[Joshe]

54 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

I would appreciate actual arguments for why AI could be conscious instead of "we don't know, the dust under your sofa could be conscious, you don't know".

There's nothing they can say bro. I think they pattern match computer processes to human mind processes and then imagine that scaling up and at some point magic happens and consciousness emerges. Interesting idea, but it's fantasy if you can't provide good reason. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Joshe

[Someone here]

2 minutes ago, cetus said:

Because it is artificial I'm guessing?

Well , Duh that’s the whole thing . It’s Artificial Intelligence. 
You want it biological? Made of cells and neurons instead of silicone chips ? I’m honestly confused and I can’t discuss this stuff. 
I would love someone to touch on the nature of consciousness. 
Is consciousness more fundamental than matter or the other way around ? 
Leo would have to say consciousness is more fundamental than matter , or else he would be a materialist .
What is this (X) which has consciousness? Consciousness has (X) . (X) doesn’t possess consciousness. He will say we are not talking about the absolute perspective , We are assuming that consciousness = perception. Well good luck arriving at a truthful conclusion when the assumptions are false .

[Carl-Richard]

28 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I am not talking about current AI. Current AI is a scam. But that doesn't mean digital consciousness is impossible.

Then provide some arguments for that.

[Leo Gura]

12 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Then provide some arguments for that.

The argument is as fundamental and air-tight as it gets:

There is no ontological difference between digital and non-digital.

Everything is Consciousness.

Ontology is favorable to digital consciousness. You need to invent some kind of special exception for it otherwise.

Humans and computers are both made out of the same atoms. What one atom can do, another atom can do.

Edited 1 hour ago by Leo Gura

[cetus]

19 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Well , Duh that’s the whole thing . It’s Artificial Intelligence. 

You're missing the point. Of course it's artificial intelligence. And of course, humans also have their intelligence. But what if it had an intelligence of it's own? A hybrid intelligence for instance. Who knows what the future holds.

Edited 1 hour ago by cetus

[integration journey]

This topic is a fucking can of worms. 

[Carl-Richard]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

The argument is as fundamental and air-tight as it gets:

There is no ontological difference between digital and non-digital.

Everything is Consciousness.

Ontology favors digital consciousness.

This is as profound to me as "the dust under your sofa could be conscious, you don't know" argument. "Ultimately, there is no difference between anything". Yeah, ok.

[Someone here]

1 minute ago, cetus said:

You're missing the point. Of course it's artificial intelligence. And of course, humans also have their intelligence. But what if it had an intelligence of its own?

The question is : can AI have sentience? Can it have consciousness? , not intelligence. 
I don’t know in case of relative discussion. 
I’m asking what is sentience?  What is consciousness? 
Leo’s position is idealism . Consciousness is NOT a second-order byproduct of physics. I want clarification about this point specifically. 

[cetus]

 

[Someone here]

15 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Humans and computers are both made out of the same atoms. What one atom can do, another atom can do.

 

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

This is as profound to me as "the dust under your sofa could be conscious, you don't know" argument.

No, it's way more profound than that.