Stop Anthropomorphizing Intermediate Tokens as Reasoning/Thinking Traces (2025)

Maybe if you the argument was that B is only true because of A, and only for that reason. That’s hardly the case when comparing LLMs and humans. The population behavior of humans isn’t the only thing where there’s both overlap and sharp distinction. The underlying mechanism and substrate are also completely different.

To say the same process is occurring with all this different is bizarre, and that is why the OP is right about which direction the argument of similarity has meaning.

You don’t disagree that our only pre-LLM exemplars of conscious thinking systems is from biology right?

If you’re introducing a new member, you have to compare it across all levels before making a similarity claim. It’s the height of ridiculousness to think otherwise.

Well, define "feel" - in a context that could be also applied to machines. It seems to be (if we really had to employ it for the sake of discussion) "getting signals from peripherals, orienting action".

You said (originally):

> I’d urge you to not keep insisting consciousness is a total mystery.

But don't want to get into the philosophy of it. I'd urge you to consider the definition of conciousness (as specified by the original question) wasn't just about biology. And it is 100% very difficult to define.

> We do have entry and exit conditions. We can disrupt it and study the dynamics of the disruption.

We've known life and death for quite some time. Even from the biological perspective, there's nothing new there in the largest sense. All we've done is refine it. Animals are aware of it.

> but seems to want to hold to the belief that we’ve solved consciousness with LLMs

Quite the contrary, much like everything else, the more we learn, the more questions we have.

> Seems more productive to compare the physical dynamics and see what’s different and what’s similar, no?

ok but....

> how is that not logically distinct from a system that is outside of regular time, needs to check a clock to locate itself in time, and then do whatever dynamics it does to solve the problem at hand?

We only check clocks because we have an internal molecular dynamic that directs us to do so, and it is tied to a similar system as everything else.

> But don't want to get into the philosophy of it. I'd urge you to consider the definition of conciousness (as specified by the original question) wasn't just about biology. And it is 100% very difficult to define.

No. I don't engage in the philosophy of it because most of the consciousness philosophy that gets bandied about and is familiar to folks is from 20-30 years ago, and rest on knowledge that is significantly less granular about details.

You don't, for instance, demand physicists need to engage in the philosophy of gravity do you? You demand theory. Neuroscience does the same of consciousness, and there are definite theories with support coming at the problem from different ends.

Insisting it's a mystery without engaging with the facts is not what I'm interested in.

> We've known life and death for quite some time. Even from the biological perspective, there's nothing new there in the largest sense. All we've done is refine it. Animals are aware of it.

Not quite sure what this means, but as with consciousness, I'd say life also isn't a complete mystery, we have made great strides understanding it as it is and it's evolution in the past few decades, and while the philosophy of life, mired in assumptions from past decades, remains hopelessly stalled, the science of life has simply moved on.

> We only check clocks because we have an internal molecular dynamic that directs us to do so, and it is tied to a similar system as everything else.

Is this tongue in cheek? Nothing about our internal molecular clock tells us to check clocks. For most of life, there were no manufactured clocks, remember? They are a relatively recent invention.

Jeez.

Let me address the p-zombie first: it's a biological impossibly. Saying a p-zombie can be conceived of that has no inner feeling is like saying I can conceive of a philosophical star that radiates dark. Very nice that you can do that, but it's physically meaningless.

Why does biology preclude a philosophical zombie? Because every year we find new evidence of how utterly interdependent brain processes are and how tied to the experiential history of an organism.

We have mapped out the initial engrams that form in response to a new salient memory, and seen that 1. Time of day, 2. Physical location 3. Internal state all unique to the organism drive it's specific response, the specific way it saves the memory, etc.

That is, the organisms path history, it's interactions with the environment over space and time, shape it specifically based on the spaces and times IT experienced.

Take circadian rhythms, the internal timekeeping system all animals have. You feel it go haywire when you have jetlag. That is quite literally a history dependent response from your circadian clock to unexpected light.

Your p-zombie, if you specify it to have exactly your rhythms, will then need to have identical molecules being produced at identical times in every single cell, because that is how circadian rhythms are instantiated in all life, it's in each cell, and these cells can be synchronized, or, due to events like long distance travel or shift work, desynchronize. When desynchronized, you feel it, you feel different parts of your body adjusting, your meals shift, your taste and mood for food shifts...

Now, to put this in perfective, a human has about 36 trillion of their own cells, and an equal quantity of single cells symbiotes and commensal organisms, which give off all kinds of chemicals that shape, among other things, the circadian rhythms we talked about.

Now can you tell me: does the p zombie have not judt an identical compliment of 70 trillion odd cells, and they will all be in the same phase all the time as the cells in the non-zombie conscious person?

If so... How is this masterful phase synchrony across space achieved? What physical process allows for this?

If you cannot conceive of a way to do this synchrony (and you won't, basic physics forbids it), I think the sensible conclusion is to stop worrying about the philosophical zombies, and start looking at what information we have about actual humans and animals.

I brought up clocks to make a point, but actually, the evidence is building the biological clock is foundational for consciousness:

Some clinical signs: https://academic.oup.com/sleep/article/45/7/zsac094/6571981

And a broader theory: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34382225/