The debate over AI consciousness is escalating into a political issue — analysis by Cryptalist
The question of whether artificial intelligence possesses consciousness is no longer purely academic. Researchers from Google DeepMind have concluded that future disagreements on this topic could become deep, difficult to resolve, and escalate into political conflicts. This is not just a philosophical debate, but about real social and legal consequences that we are already beginning to observe.
Main Thesis: From Science to Politics
In their work, researchers Adam Bales and Iason Gabriel emphasize that society needs to discuss not only the question "is AI conscious," but also how to make decisions in the absence of consensus. People will react differently to advanced AI systems: some will attribute emotions and consciousness to them, while others will consider this absurd. This debate could quickly move beyond science and lead to moral conflicts — for example, over whether it is permissible to shut down certain systems or whether their possible preferences need to be considered.
Why This Is Not Just Philosophy
The problem is that there is no single universally accepted test for AI consciousness. Technologies are already being used on a mass scale, people are forming attitudes towards them, and there is still no scientific or political consensus. This makes the question not so much technical as institutional. It touches on law, corporate responsibility, and the boundaries of moral consideration. Essentially, we are on the verge of a situation where technology is outpacing our ability to comprehend it.
Internal Disagreements at DeepMind
Notably, the work by Bales and Gabriel was published alongside another paper from Google DeepMind. Researcher Alexander Lerchner argues that algorithmic manipulation of symbols is structurally incapable of creating subjective experience. In his view, AI can simulate conscious behavior but cannot embody consciousness. This shows that even within a single organization, there is no consensus.
What the Data Says
A survey of 300 US residents showed that 33% of respondents are confident that ChatGPT is not a "subject of experience," while 67% allow at least some possibility of phenomenal consciousness in the model. Although the researchers acknowledge the limitations of the method, this demonstrates an important point: part of society is already ready to attribute internal experience to AI, even if experts have not reached a consensus.
In April 2025, the company Anthropic launched a research program on model welfare — the possible well-being of models — emphasizing that it does not know whether AI systems possess consciousness. And in February 2026, after decommissioning Claude Opus 3, the company kept the model available for paid users and gave it a public channel for essays — an experimental measure as part of working with model preferences.
Legal Aspect
In the US, the question of AI's status is gradually moving into the legal arena. Idaho and Utah have already adopted norms excluding the recognition of AI as a legal entity. These laws do not resolve the philosophical question of consciousness, but they establish a legal position: AI should not receive legal personhood status. This is a preventive measure that is likely to set a precedent for other states.
My analysis: The crypto industry should closely monitor this trend. If debates about AI consciousness lead to stricter regulation, this could also affect the field of decentralized technologies, especially projects related to AI agents and autonomous systems. Questions of the moral status and legal responsibility of AI are not a distant future, but our reality, which we need to prepare for now.