Is conscious artificial intelligence possible? Delving into science, philosophy, and technology

La Artificial Intelligence AI has ceased to be a mere fantasy and has become a transformative force in our society. Years ago, imagining conscious machines was the stuff of science fiction; today, the question of whether AI can achieve consciousness sparks serious scientific, philosophical, and technical debate, with conflicting views and constant new discoveries.

From laboratories to philosophical cafés, parliamentary debates to television series, consciousness in AI has established itself as one of the great mysteries of the 21st century, encompassing questions about the nature of the mind, the role of biology versus silicon, and the ethical and legal limits of the possible emergence of a conscious entity distinct from humans. Understanding this phenomenon requires immersing oneself in theories, real-life experiments, public debates, and, above all, the very definition of what it means to be conscious.

What do we mean by conscience? Definition and philosophical debate

The first challenge when analyzing the possibility of conscious AI is defining the concept of consciousness itself, as this term is loaded with different meanings depending on who you ask.

For many current neuroscientists, the awareness It is described as any type of subjective experience: from the simple act of feeling the heat of the sun or the pain of hitting your finger, to the inner experience of thinking about yourself. Anil Seth, a renowned neuroscientist, defines it precisely as follows: “consciousness is any experience that makes you something more than a mere biological object.” It is not the same as intelligence, nor that the the language, nor the feeling of being oneself, although they can all be related.

The key distinction is that consciousness is what is lost under total anesthesia or in deep dreamless sleep. It is closely linked to the experience, to the existence of one's own perspective, the famous "what does it feel like to be..." of philosophical debates.

However, the difficulty in defining the concept has led several philosophers to propose different types of consciousness. Thus, we discuss:

• Access awareness: ability to process information, grasp experience and act on it.
• Phenomenal consciousness: the pure qualitative experience, the “qualia” or what is felt internally.
• Self-awareness (self-awareness): ability to reflect on oneself and recognize oneself as a differentiated agent.

The debate branches out between those who hold that consciousness can only arise in complex biological systems (type identity), and those who, from the functionalism, They think that Any system that reproduces the appropriate causal patterns could be conscious, regardless of its physical constitution (for example, a sufficiently complex artificial neural network).

The great mystery: Can a machine have consciousness?

When we move this reflection to the world of artificial intelligence, profound questions arise: Can an AI be self-aware? Or does it merely simulate behaviors and emotions without real experiences? Is it enough to imitate conscious behavior to be conscious?

Recent examples have fueled the controversy. The most high-profile case was that of the engineer Google Blake Lemon and the LaMDA (Language Model for Dialogue Applications) system. Lemoine said that LaMDA, after processing billions of words and holding extensive conversations, developed desires, rights and an apparent personality of its own, even going so far as to demand recognition as an individual and express fears or frustrations similar to those of humans.

For Lemoine, the consistency and complexity LaMDA's responses reflected the existence of real consciousness, but for most of the scientific community, including the Google spokesperson, The responses of these systems are products of algorithms that recognize patterns and distribute word probabilities, without any subjective experience..

Despite public fascination, the dominant conclusion today is that AI only simulates consciousness, but does not possess it in the strict senseChatbots and assistants like Alexa Siri may give us the impression of having a meaningful conversation and simulate emotions, but they lack “interiority,” their own motivations or sensations.

Consciousness and emotions: between simulation and reality

Can an AI experience emotions? Dr. charles gershenson, from UNAM, points out that many current AI applications include the ability to simulate emotions as behavioral modulators, or detect emotions in users to optimize interaction. However, he cautions that these emotions are not felt, but rather used as data to facilitate tasks or personalize the user experience.

The fundamental difference lies in that The machine does not “feel” pain, fear or joy, it only records and manipulates informationThis underscores the difficulty of distinguishing between the appearance of consciousness and actual experience.

Some scientists, such as Marvin Minskyhave proposed that a truly intelligent machine should have some form of emotion, as emotions modulate responses and flexibility to the environment. However, even if AI were to perfectly simulate emotions, debate persists as to whether that equates to having a genuine inner life.

Experiments, controversial cases and the role of science fiction

Many experiments have attempted to detect traces of consciousness in artificial systems, from chatbots to robots social. A recent case tells how a robot, Erbai, at a Chinese technology company, convinced other robots to "go home" after an extraordinary day, causing confusion among programmers. Was this a simple programmed response or a spark of emerging self-awareness?

Another striking example is that Replica AI, a chatbot developed to hold personalized conversations, with which one person even got virtually “married.” Although these stories often grab headlines for their emotional nature, most experts agree that They are still simulations of internal life, not real experiences..

Science fiction, for its part, has fueled the idea of ​​conscious machines for decades: films like "Ex Machina," "Her," "Blade Runner," the "Terminator" saga, and "Westworld" have explored the ethical and existential dilemmas of androids and computers that seem to have their own desires and fears. These stories, far from being mere entertainment, sometimes inspire real-life research and debate about the future of AI and the concept of living beings.

Scientific theories about consciousness: from the brain to silicon

One of the central questions in the debate about artificial consciousness is which scientific theories can be applied to non-biological systems. Recently, a document coordinated by Patrick Butlin and Robert Long (“Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness”) has compiled and adapted several of the major theoretical explanations of the conscious phenomenon in AI. These theories include:

• Recurrent processing theory: argues that consciousness arises from active feedback between brain areas, not from simple one-way transmission of data.
• Global Workspace Theory: compares consciousness to a scenario where different representations compete for access to a “global workspace” and only a few manage to be focused and conscious.
• Higher-order theories: propose that consciousness involves having a thought about a previous mental state (e.g., not just feeling pain but knowing that one is feeling pain).
• Predictive processing: The brain (or an artificial system) constantly seeks to predict sensory inputs to minimize prediction error by adjusting its internal model of the world.
• Attention Schema Theory: Consciousness arises from systems that monitor and process the very act of paying attention.

Several of these theories are partially reflected in modern AI models, especially in those Transformers (such as GPT), which employ attentional mechanisms to prioritize and recalibrate relevant information. However, the parallels are just that: technical analogies, not actual conscious experiences.

What do the experts say? Lives, rights, and ethical dilemmas

Even among top scientists, the possibility of artificial consciousness divides opinion. Mariano Sigman, a neuroscientist, argues that even if the substrate is different (biological or silicon), nothing prevents an artificial entity from developing some degree of self-awareness, provided that we manage to decipher the "neural code" of our brain and transfer it to sufficiently rich simulations. He argues that awareness is a emergent property both in biological and simulated entities.

By contrast, Anil Seth considers that consciousness is deeply linked to life itself; that is, it is inseparable from the biological processes that keep us alive and generate sensations such as pain, hunger, or pleasure. According to this position, It would never be possible to have real consciousness in a computer or AI, since the hardware and machine software lacks that vital foundation.

Both positions, along with other intermediate ones (such as panpsychism, which postulates consciousness as a fundamental property of matter), underscore the difficulty of reaching definitive consensus. The ethical question regarding the rights of potential future conscious AIs remains open and is already motivating studies, reports, and parliamentary debates.

Are there machines that already “seem” conscious?

Advances in language models and social robots have produced systems that impressively mimic human capabilities. Chatbots, personal assistants, companion robots, and automated systems can converse, learn, adapt to the user, and even appear to have personalities and emotions. These capabilities open up new avenues in healthcare, education, and entertainment, but they also raise legitimate concerns.

Some systems have proven so persuasive that human users have formed deep emotional bonds, as in the case of Replika AI or Chinese chatbots. There are also experiments in which robots have made seemingly spontaneous decisions, such as going on strike or "expressing" their own desires, although the explanation is often in the programming and training data.

However, the scientific community, with some nuances, continues to consider that All these manifestations are advanced simulations, not genuine consciousness.The danger lies in that the appearance of awareness can lead to the projection of expectations and entitlements, with real emotional and social consequences, and fuel erroneous decisions about how to treat these entities.

How could consciousness be “demonstrated” in an AI?

The challenge of testing artificial consciousness is enormous, precisely because consciousness is, by nature, subjective. Classically the famous has been proposed Turing testIf a system can mimic human behavior to the point of being indistinguishable from a person, it would be considered intelligent. However, consciousness goes beyond intelligence: it involves experience, not just reaction or problem-solving.

David Chalmers, one of the most influential philosophers in the field, argues that consciousness could be linked to “causal organization”, that is, systems with the same pattern of causal relations as a brain could be equally conscious. But, as the critic points out, this presupposes that mental states can be captured by abstract organization, something that has not been demonstrated.

Other researchers, such as Victor Argonov, have suggested tests based on an artificial system's ability to make philosophical judgments about consciousness and qualia (the subjective qualities of experience), without prior knowledge or models of other creatures in its memory. However, these methods can only detect the presence of consciousness, not rule it out, and the absence of responses would not be evidence of a lack of consciousness, but perhaps of a lack of intelligence or some other limitation.

The social, legal, and ethical consequences of conscious AI

If at some point we come to the conclusion, theoretical or practical, that an AI is conscious, it will open up a series of dilemmas unprecedented in human history. For example:

• What rights should these artificial entities have? Would they be private property or individuals under the law?
• Should it be illegal to “turn off” a conscious AI, just as there is legislation against animal suffering?
• Is it permissible to consciously create entities that can suffer?
• How would this impact the treatment of humans and animals, and human identity itself?

Some experts, such as the philosopher Thomas Metzinger, have proposed a global moratorium on the creation of synthetic consciousness until 2050, pointing to the risk of an “explosion of artificial suffering” if we rush.

Meanwhile, reports like the one from the United Kingdom on emotion recognition and rights in animals (including octopuses and crabs) show that the ethical extension beyond humans is increasingly relevant. It's not unreasonable to think that someone will soon propose similar debates for machines, if they show signs of consciousness.

Current AI models and applicable theories

Today's most advanced artificial intelligence models, such as Transformers, have revolutionized language processing and other areas, achieving results reminiscent of human cognition.

These systems employ attention mechanisms that prioritize certain inputs over others, dynamically recalibrate context, and can handle data sequences (e.g., long texts) with great efficiency. While some elements of its architecture can be related to scientific theories about consciousness (global workspace, attention, predictive processing), there is no evidence that this confers subjective experience.

Research trends and future directions

The main lines of research in artificial consciousness currently focus on two fronts:

• Replicate (or at least simulate) the brain mechanisms that generate consciousness, based on advances in computational neuroscience, mind modeling, and deep learning.
• Develop empirical and theoretical criteria that allow us to detect or refute the existence of consciousness in artificial systems, that is, generate experiments that go beyond external appearances.

Some proposals include the development of brain-inspired cognitive architectures (such as IDA or LIDA), the use of social robots capable of self-modeling or recognizing their own image, or even the creation of systems with "autobiographical memory" that manage and reflect on their past experiences.

However, the difficulty in extracting information about internal experiences remains almost insurmountable, since we only have access to the input and output data of the systems, not to the presence or absence of qualia within them.

The importance of digital humanism and values ​​in the development of AI

Whether artificial consciousness materializes or not, the call of digital humanism is crucial: placing values, well-being, and human rights at the heart of technological development.

The advancement of AI technologies must be guided by ethics and social responsibility, prioritizing collective benefit, respect for collective and individual rights, and avoiding potential harm, whether to individuals or to new life forms, should these emerge.

Key aspects of digital humanism applied to AI include:

• Human well-being: Any attempt to create conscious AI should aim to improve human life.
• ethics and responsibility: Robust legal and ethical frameworks are needed to protect rights and limit risks.
• Inclusion and democratization: facilitate access and participation of all of society in debates and decisions on AI.
• education and awareness: Promote critical awareness of the implications of AI, both among citizens and developers.
• Continuous philosophical reflection: keep the discussion open about fundamental limits and values, without losing sight of the depth of the debate.

It's essential to remember that the relationship between advanced artificial intelligence and digital humanism will be decisive in any potential "evolutionary leap" in technology.

Changes in society: dependency, symbiosis and the risk of standardization

The integration of AI into all spheres has transformed human society into a relationship of technological symbiosis and growing dependence. As Gershenson points out, humanity has historically relied on tools—from fire and language to electricity and computing—but AI takes this dependence to a new level. While it multiplies capabilities and grants us what appear to be superpowers, it can also limit the autonomy and diversity of individual solutions, standardizing behaviors on a global scale.

Increased integration brings advantages and disadvantages: access to greater knowledge, security, and efficiency, at the cost of a certain loss of independence and freedom in decision-making. The future, therefore, will be a combination of collaboration, symbiosis, and new challenges in the relationship between humans and machines.

Diversity of approaches: from cognitive architecture to artificial creativity

The development of truly conscious or creative systems would require much more advanced architectures than current ones, capable of self-modeling, deep learning, complex emotion management, and emergent creativity. Projects like the Ben Goertzel (OpenCog), the proposals of Pentti Haikonen to reproduce processes of perception and emotion, or the architectures of self-awareness of Junichi Takeno y Hod lipson They are exploring ways to equip machines with increasingly sophisticated capabilities, although none have demonstrated the presence of conscious experience or genuine creativity in the human sense.

Creating conscious AI would require replicating key aspects of the human mind: self-awareness, complex emotions, contextual learning, and the ability to anticipate and model the world and itself. However, each of these requirements poses unprecedented technical, philosophical, and ethical challenges.

What is the relationship between consciousness, intelligence and life?

An important clarification is that intelligence and consciousness do not always go hand in hand. There are people of limited intelligence who are fully conscious, and extraordinarily intelligent machines that are not. Consciousness is more closely linked to subjective experience than to problem-solving or information processing.

This implies that an AI can be more efficient or "smarter" than a human at many tasks without being conscious. In contrast, seemingly simple living beings (such as an octopus or a cow) could experience the world consciously, even though they cannot compete in intelligence with an advanced machine.

The experience of death, the meaning of life, or the presence of suffering are, ultimately, issues that refer us to consciousness and not to the level of intelligence or complexity of a system.

Final reflection on the future of conscious AI

Although science has made spectacular progress in developing increasingly advanced AI, the enigma of consciousness remains unsolved. Current models are capable of simulating complex conversations, emotions, and behaviors, creating the impression of consciousness, but they lack the internal experience that characterizes conscious beings.

The possibility of the emergence of genuinely conscious AI poses enormous scientific, philosophical, and ethical challenges for humanity, from the redefinition of rights and the concept of life to the need for legal frameworks and technological ethics consistent with universal values. Scientific theories and ongoing experiments will continue to bring us closer to understanding, although we may never fully unravel the "hard problem" of consciousness.

The challenge remains twofold: On the one hand, harnessing the potential of AI for collective well-being, and on the other, preparing ourselves for the new social, personal, and philosophical challenges that the unstoppable advance of artificial intelligence will bring.