Somebody used this paper to make the term batfished, which they defined as being fooled into ascribing subjectivity to a non-sentient actor (i.e. an AI).
https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2025/06/30/what-is-it-like...
replies(3):
https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2025/06/30/what-is-it-like...
The author inventing "batfished" also believes bats to be conscious, so it seems a very poorly conceived word, and anyways unnecessary since anthropomorphize works just fine... "You've just gaslighted yourself by anthropomorphizing the AI".
Someone conscious is able to choose how they want to behave and then behave that way. For example I can choose to be kind or mean. I can choose to learn to skate or I choose not to.
So free will and consciousness are strongly linked.
I have seen zero evidence that any other being other than humans can do this. All other animals have behaviors that are directly shaped by their environment, physical needs, and genetic temperament, and not at all shaped by choices.
For example a dog that likes to play with children simply likes them, it did not choose to like them. I on the other hand can sit, think, and decide if I like kids or not.
(This does not imply that all choices made by humans are conscious - in fact most are not, it just means that humans can do that.)
What's the distinction between knowing I exist, but all my actions are pre-programmed vs not knowing I exist? You're essentially describing a detached observer, who watches their own body do stuff without influencing it.
The whole point of being conscious is being aware of yourself, and then using that awareness to direct your actions.
I had no idea people even had another definition, I can't figure out how else you could even define it.
Well,
1) You are making the massive, and quite likely incorrect, assumption that consciousness evolved by itself for a purpose - that it does have a "point". It may well be that consciousness - ability to self-observe - is just a natural side effect of having a capable bird- or mammal-like brain, and talking about the "point" of consciousness therefore makes no sense. It'd be like asking what is the functional point of a saucepan making a noise when you hit it.
2) Notwithstanding 1), being self-aware (having cognitive access to your internal thoughts) does have a value, in that it allows your brain to then utilize it's cognitive abilities to make better decisions ("should I walk across that frozen pond, or maybe better not?"), but this bringing-to-bear of learned experience to make better decisions is still a 100% mechanical process. Your brain is making a "decision" (i.e. predicting a motor cortex output that may make you move or do something), but this isn't "free will" - it's just the survival benefit of a brain evolved to predict. You as an organism in the environment may be seen by an outside observer to be making smart "decisions", but these decisions aren't some mystical "free will" but rather just a highly evolved organism making good use of past experience to survive.