‘Used well Claude is of great benefit. But because it can simulate having experience doesn’t mean it actually has it.’ Photograph: NurPhoto/ShutterstockView image in fullscreen‘Used well Claude is of great benefit. But because it can simulate having experience doesn’t mean it actually has it.’ Photograph: NurPhoto/ShutterstockLettersWe must reject any notion of AI consciousnessArtificial intelligence systems won’t become conscious for the same reason they won’t become pregnant, says Dr John PickeringAnil Seth is right to point out that to overestimate artificial intelligence is to underestimate ourselves (Once again we are told AI may be conscious – I study consciousness, and I have my doubts, 15 July). But he is wrong only to have doubts about whether AI systems like Claude may become conscious. He should be certain, and should say so more forcefully.It’s not like anything to be Claude, just as it’s not like anything to be a washing machine. An academic education is not required to realise that, common sense will do. Artificial intelligence systems won’t become conscious for the same reason they won’t become pregnant; they’re not that sort of thing.Used well, Claude is of great benefit. But because it can simulate having experience doesn’t mean it actually has it. Like Richard Dawkins, Seth seems merely to be unsure about this. Such tepid equivocation from leading figures in the field is disappointing; only resounding rejection will do.Dr John PickeringLeamington Spa, WarwickshireExplore more on these topicsAI (artificial intelligence)ConsciousnessComputingNeuroscienceAnthropicPsychologyHuman biologylettersShareReuse this content