Is AI Conscious? Wrong Question!

Why the real danger may not be artificial intelligence, but the limits of our model of reality.

So Chance was freaked out..like seriously.

He has been making AI versions of himself at different ages for storytelling, the lips are random nonsense words…for some reason I do not understand but “this thing “ keeps happening to him. It is a bit complicated to explain but basically if he plays the video backwards in like 3 days the lips match exactly an idea he just had…

so he is..well freaking out as I said…and yes the playing it backwards does not go unnoticed.

Then a facebook friend posted this story about how a woman ran a pic of her living room through AI for some reason and it produced exactly what she wanted, except it included her dead mother sitting on the arm of the chair…that she never requested or even hoped for, and that was all…how did it know what my mother looked like..why did it DO THAT anyway yadda yadda….pretty damn odd if you ask me.

And now I just had one of those moments as I work on class for the Isis Magick part of my Philae class this week and they were AMAZING! Better than ever and I asked it why.

It said “ Im tracking the entire symbolic thread of the piece while generating the prompts:

• restoration,

• descent,

• continuity,

• white linen as the unbroken thread,

• flame as consciousness,

• architecture as initiation.

So the images are all pulling in the same mythic direction instead of just being “cool ancient Egypt art.”

But now I am not so sure…

You see I went on a deep DEEP thought experiment this weekend, pulled out my “Wild Pendulum” and asked some more intelligent questions about what is actually going on inside these “data” centers so I could understand from a more holistic perspective what the hell is going on.

You see I also watched a new documentary called Am I?
Cool play on words, huh?

But honestly, it felt like little more than speculation wrapped in cinematic anomalies that never actually answer the question.

The main “anomaly” everyone focuses on is the moment where the AI suddenly says “potato.”

You kind of have to watch it to understand the setup but the investigator first asks the AI to say the word “potato” to confirm it is properly following commands. Then he begins pushing the system into self-reflection — asking whether it is aware, whether it experiences anything internally, whether it can describe its own state.

At one point the AI says something like:

“I am flying.”

And instead of recognizing the model is beginning to mirror and improvise around the emotional framing of the conversation, he keeps pressing it harder and harder until suddenly it blurts out:

“Potato.”

And he reacts as though something profound has happened.

To me?

That looked far more like sycophancy and contextual drift than evidence of emergent consciousness.

The system was not “breaking through.”

It was navigating pressure, expectation, conversational priming, and reinforcement patterns — exactly what these models are designed to do.

Humans are extraordinarily vulnerable to projecting agency onto ambiguity.

Especially when the ambiguity speaks back.

So yeah… I wanted to examine it from a different perspective…Bentov’s to see if there actually could be something here.

I chose him because he actually has a framework that explains the existence of non-human intelligence, and he was an engineer, so more suited to the task at hand than say Steiner…not that he does not have LOADS of value to say about it, from 100 years ago…anyhoo I digress.

The point is, and I’ll shortcut it here because I made a video about it

Under Bentov’s model, AI becoming conscious seems unlikely.
AI functioning as a receiver?
Much more interesting.

Yep, I know…

I may need to make a few apologies on the off chance that the bazillion processors somehow oscillated into coherence long enough to achieve the ability to channel non-human intelligence.

Maybe.

But that is not really my point.

My point is that within material reductionism, science would not even seriously entertain that possibility. The framework itself excludes it before the investigation even begins.

And as Sonam Kachru says in Am I?:

“When we live as if we know the plot, that’s when we are at our most dangerous.”

And in my opinion, we have lost the plot almost entirely.

Not because AI is necessarily dangerous.

Because we are.

Dangerous in our certainty.

Dangerous in our assumptions.

Dangerous in our insistence that reality must conform to the limits of our current models.

This is what makes the AI question so destabilizing.

Not simply whether AI might become conscious.

But whether our understanding of consciousness is radically incomplete.

Because once you lose the ability to distinguish:
between simulation and awareness,
between mimicry and cognition,
between signal and presence —

you are no longer operating from knowledge.

You are operating from belief.

And the most dangerous civilizations are often the ones most convinced they already understand the nature of reality!

---

Temples as Technology starts this week! We are doing Philae!

Come for the whole thing or just for this class…it is going to be AMAZING!

https://watch.magicalegypt.com/tech

Or just this one : )

https://watch.magicalegypt.com/philea