> It's software. It can't be conscious. What definition of consciousness are you basing this assertion on? Or are you saying this axiomatically? "Consciousnes

> It's software. It can't be conscious. What definition of consciousness are you basing this assertion on? Or are you saying this axiomatically? "Consciousness is something that software can never be." If we accept that consciousness in humans is some function of the working of the brain (perhaps with sensory organs too), then that entire hardware (wetware) could in theory be simulated, at which point why wouldn't the simulation (assuming it's captured all the nuances of the physical implementation) be conscious? Of course, if you believe that consciousness in humans is something that requires "something else" e.g. a "spirit" or "soul", then your statement may be true (though even then it requires a theory of spirit/soul that such a substance cannot be correlated with any other hardware, and can only be associated with human brains). Question for you. Do you believe that any other living beings e.g. dogs, possess consciousness or a level of consciousness?