The unbearable hardness of inferring being: Comment on "preliminaries to artificial consciousness" by Evers et al.
Physics of Life Reviews March 1, 2026 DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2025.12.004 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Commentary Case report Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Artificial consciousness Multiple realizability Nomological possibility Original intentionality Phenomenal experience Substrate similarity |
| Key points | Argues that the proposed heuristic for artificial consciousness research cannot adjudicate the nomological possibility of phenomenal consciousness and may only produce as-if intentionality rather than genuine awareness. |
Abstract
This commentary commends Evers et al.'s multidimensional heuristic for structuring artificial consciousness research while arguing it cannot, as stated, adjudicate the nomological possibility of phenomenal consciousness, which is at stake in current debates. Behavioral-cognitive "profiles" lack a justified principle linking function to experience, and the awareness case study illustrates how externally specified goals can just as well underwrite as-if (pseudo-intentional) control rather than original intentionality. Moreover, the proposed heuristic overlooks that substrate similarity is currently indispensable for justifiably inferring the presence of consciousness beyond the validated case of the adult human brain. Given all this, the framework seems to provide a blueprint for building a more sophisticated philosophical zombie; it does not-and cannot-tell us whether anyone is there.