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.