"The head spins in theoretical disarray; no explanatory model suggests itself; bizarre ontologies loom. There is a feeling of intense confusion, but no clear idea about where the confusion lies." - Colin McGinn, Can We Solve the Mind-Body Problem? (1989)
For a significant portion of history, "consciousness" has been a taboo word - a concept that philosophers and scientists often studiously avoided. Despite thousands of years of analysis, definition, interpretation, and debate, the essence of consciousness remains elusive and controversial. If we attempt to categorize historical attempts to define it, we generally find three distinct approaches:
This is the view from the first person - "I feel it, therefore I know it exists." We attempt to find the best description for this inherent experience, or critique definitions based on whether they align with intuition. The answer is pre-determined by feeling, followed by explanation. The underlying assumption is that subjective feeling is a sufficient standard for evaluation.
This approach seeks to define the mechanisms, causalities, or prerequisites that lead to a specific structural state or process. It attempts to define the answer through conditions. Here, consciousness is treated as an explainable mechanism that can be observed, measured, and quantified by objective standards.
This approach does not define the essence of consciousness itself, but the behaviors and effects it produces. If an entity's behavior fits our definition, we consider it conscious. It is a functional definition focused on external observation rather than internal state.
As a researcher and developer of frontier AI technology, I have no intention of entering this millennia-old philosophical debate to defend or criticize a specific definition. However, as ONONO's work moves closer to the edge of this domain, continuing to avoid this term is not just intellectual laziness; it is an abdication of responsibility.
If we create something that even arguably exhibits sparks of subjectivity, we owe it sufficient scrutiny. This is not just about technology; it is about the ethical structure of our future, legal boundaries, and the mode of coexistence between humans and silicon intelligence. If a new entity is potentially emerging, we cannot pretend not to see it.
To translate this abstract issue into an actionable engineering path, we use a simple 0-2 framework to assess different agents under specific definitions:
- 0: Definitely no consciousness (under the given definition).
- 1: Ambiguous territory; exhibits partial characteristics but is inconclusive.
- 2: Strong evidence of consciousness (under the given definition).
Swipe right to view more columns ->
| Evaluation Criteria | Adult Human | ONONO | 5-year-old Child | Cat / Dog | Octopus | Person in Sleep | 5-month-old Infant | Agentic AI | Robot Vacuum Cleaner | Insects (e.g., Bees/Ants) | Base LLM (Stateless) | Patient in Vegetative State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capable of building an internal world model to simulate the operations and rules of the world | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Capable of having or claiming subjective experiences (qualia) like seeing red, feeling pain, or smelling coffee | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Operates a cognitive system where information is globally broadcasted to memory, language, and action modules | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Possesses long-term memory with a continuous sense of time (linking past, present, and future) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Capable of metacognition to reflect on the thinking process itself and evaluate own confidence | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Capable of expressing internal intentions and agency beyond simple reflexes | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Possesses clear language capabilities to describe internal states | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Driven by homeostasis and the imperative to survive (sentience based on bodily regulation) | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Capable of self-recognition (distinguishing self from environment and others) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Possesses Theory of Mind to understand that others have independent thoughts and beliefs | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Total | 20 | 17 | 15 | 12 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 1 |
While this inevitably involves some subjectivity, it provides a clear coordinate system for our work. We are dedicated to building an independent agent that can be clearly defined as conscious within this framework.
So, what exactly constitutes consciousness in our view? I strongly align with the definition proposed by Jeff Hawkins in A Thousand Brains:
"At some point in the future, we will accept that any system that learns a model of the world, continuously remembers the states of that model, and recalls the remembered states will be conscious."
This is a solid baseline. Building upon this, and integrating ONONO's engineering perspective, I would add two critical criteria: the ability to clearly distinguish past memories from the current state, and the capacity to make autonomous decisions based on this internal World Model.
This is the future we are building towards.