[harshreality]

His positions on religion and AI seem consistent to me.

Whether AI is or isn't sentient is more of a definitional claim, and how low a bar you set for human consciousness. It has essentially nothing to do with with questions about the supernatural.

Is it really psychosis for someone, who already thinks consciousness isn't supernatural, to think that consciousness isn't special enough to be out of reach of current primitive AI efforts?

[phs318u]

> Is it really psychosis for someone, who already thinks consciousness isn't supernatural, to think that consciousness isn't special enough to be out of reach of current primitive AI efforts?

This is what I also thought. By definition, a hard atheist must be a materialist which means that consciousness - no matter how it’s defined specifically - must be a product of a material configuration. Though I do think he’s fallen for the parrot and uses this belief to self-rationalise, it’s a valid position for a hard atheist/materialist to hold. In that case how do you test an AI for consciousness?

[harshreality]

Tell me how to test a human for consciousness, and I'll tell you how to test an LLM for it. I'm not even talking about people in comas. Give me an objective test that I can take into a retirement home and run on all the awake, alert, communicative individuals there, and conclude that they're all conscious.

[causal]

The same way you test the universe for gods. Hence the irony.