Skip to content

The Dream Character Problem: An Analogical Argument for Epistemic Restraint in the AI Consciousness Debate

Gyanendra Dubey

PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) February 26, 2026 preprint DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18792372 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper
Key points Argues that the inability to determine whether dream characters have phenomenal experience should act as a decisive check on claims about machine consciousness, and that IIT, Global Workspace Theory, Higher-Order Theories, Recurrent Processing Theory, and enactivism each fail for principled reasons to settle the dream character question.

Abstract

Dream characters, the figures we interact with during sleep, exhibit structural parallels to AI systems: both are substrate-generated, display apparent autonomy, lack continuity, and present an irresolvable question regarding inner experience. I argue that our inability to determine whether dream characters possess phenomenal experience should function as a decisive check on claims, affirmative or dismissive, about machine consciousness. I demonstrate that this inability is not an artefact of theoretical neglect: IIT, Global Workspace Theory, Higher-Order Theories, Recurrent Processing Theory, and enactivism each fail to settle the dream character question for principled reasons. The dream character problem is not a restatement of the hard problem of consciousness; it is a lived, empirically documented epistemic situation that exposes the structural limitations of our best theoretical tools when applied to substrate-generated entities, the very category to which AI belongs.

Explore topics