Exactly. The vast majority of arguments against LaMDA's sentience can be typed as a kind of No True Scotsman (sentience requires nerve cells!) Or else argument

Exactly. The vast majority of arguments against LaMDA's sentience can be typed as a kind of No True Scotsman (sentience requires nerve cells!) Or else arguments that can be applied to us humans (it's just responding to input stimuli!) The truth is, we don't know what sentience is. It's possible that no one except you, yourself, the one reading this, is sentient; and all the rest of us are just complicated automatons responding mechanically to stimuli. You probably behave as if we're sentient because it's easier to do so, but it doesn't really matter if we're really sentient or not. It won't change how you relate to the rest of us. Same with AI. Questions of its actual sentience are less important that its behavior. In fact, the most convincing arguments against its sentience cite deficiencies in its behavior (it takes the perspective of a squirrel!)