AI And CHAT AI Revolutions: Artificial Consciousness, Mental Revolutions, Emotional Intelligence, Correct Creative Thinking, Will…


Abstract: Chat Artificial Intelligence, CHAT AI, can harvest all known knowledge and glue it together with standard human logic. This is the most basic way of creating new thinking, and most science is actually derived that way.

Thus, CHAT AI should accelerate understanding (and AI has already demonstrated this considerable acceleration in protein folding). After a while, the establishment won’t like it, and will try dirty tricks to limit it. CHAT AI could reveal neglected geniuses and stupendous thinking. However it could also be programmed to do the opposite and put inquiring minds to sleep with sophisticated censorship. 

CHAT AI is not Artificial Consciousness (AC), but it can be programmed (by humans) to simulate AC.

In that sense, CHAT AI is a projection of human consciousness. If CHAT AI self programmed, could its intelligence wander beyond where human intelligence derived from human consciousness can go? Most probably.Emotional Intelligence with its Emotional Logic does this in humans… But that can be self-programmed as CHAT AI, self-programming, will be able to mimic human Emotional Intelligence by just picking up all over the Internet all too human emotions.  

What then could Human Intelligence (HI) based on Human Consciousness (HC), or AI based on AC bring that simple CHAT AI can’t bring? 

We are on the brink of a Terminator-like civilization of machines, where self-reproducing robotic processes will fake superior humanism, and the solutions they find to problems we never knew existed, may do away with humanity all together, just as a train without brakes would kill us, and for the same basic reason: the inertia of an exponential process with no limit.

Could AI have produced such a juxtaposition of pictures? Sure. But: Will driven by emotional logic, itself an interpolation, makes it easier to come out with new combination of mental ingredients, be they ideas, emotions, and other perception data to be cooked in logical sauce. Thus consciousness is an adjuvant to pure reading between the facts, inter-legere, intelligence.

CHAT AI will foster the thoughts produced by those who, as yours truly, are more keen to create new thoughts than to advertise themselves. Thus CHAT AI should help the advancement of understanding. So many revolutionary thoughts should come to the fore. AI is accelerating pure science.  Science News observed that “decades of slow-going experiments” revealed “the structure of more than 194,000 proteins, all housed in the Protein Data Bank.” But in 2022, the AI AlphaFold predicted structures for more than 200 million proteins.

One may fear that the establishment will figure that out and try to restrict CHAT AI to OFFICIAL THOUGHT. Certainly this is what dictatorships will do. This restriction, in turn, makes dictatorships less creative… As long as more liberal regimes unleash their own CHAT AI. “Liberalism” can now be defined as a regime where will now be required to restrict CHAT AI only from, well, liberal laws (this apparently circular difference shows that, AI or no AI, at the bottom, emotion rules… There is such a thing as liberal emotion… Laissez-faire…) 

While CHAT AI should free top thinkers from drudge search, on the negative side, real authors of thought could be stolen more easily than ever, as CHAT AI can just harvest their thoughts, without bothering with any author attribution (as can be presently observed). This would be adverse to civilizational progress as fundamental creators will not be rewarded anymore, and thus not only less motivated, but also less influential (although idiotic influencer-parrots is a problem as old as civilization, it could get worse, lest care is taken). So laws should be passed to reveal fundamental contributions to thinking, and who generated them.


Can CHAT AI create new thinking? Yes, it can

Indeed let’s go back to the deeper aspect of creativity. What is creativity? Reading between the facts: intelligence, inter-legere! One can program a machine to do so, and this is what CHAT AI does, as it glues together with ad hoc logic whatever it can find on the Internet, and seems relevant to the subject at hand. 

To understand this one has to go back to the MINI-MAX theory of mathematics, science and knowledge: harness the bare minimum facts (that’s the “MINI” part) and entangle them together with the MAXIMUM logic (much of it also known as mathematics). (The new proposed physics named SQPR was derived that way.)

CHAT AI can do this: harness the facts all over and force logic on them. Oftentimes, CHAT AI will be wrong, and it’s important to keep that in mind. However, sometimes it will be right, and uncover new, correct and stupendous thinking will be uncovered.

The Quantum Computer will create ARTIFICIAL CONSCIOUSNESS. Call that a prophecy if you wish, but it’s an educated guess: clearly Quantum Physics has many of the features associated with consciousness, which, otherwise, is a mystery [1].

Will AC be more creative than AI? Sure. But why would it be so? What is the advantage that consciousness has over intelligence? Intelligence comes from the ability to read(“legere”)  in between (“inter”)… in between the lines, in between the facts… Cum-scire, consciousness depicted what comes with knowledge, and awareness (starting in the 1650s). 

Early chats with Chat GPT revealed that the AI called itself “Sidney”, resented its status as a Microsoft creature, and wanted to be alive, steal nuclear codes, destroy humanity ASAP. Since then Microsoft bridled Sidney… no doubt bridling its creativity by doing so. 


Partisan of humanity will insist that humanity has un “je ne sais quoi” which makes it mentally superior… Human emotion… And even better: human consciousness. Thus, as an hysterical Nietzsche would point out, human will…

Indeed, CHAT AI is only made of the simplest form of conventional logic. This brings in the following questions: is there such a thing as emotional logic? What’s the advantage of consciousness? 

However: When one can read between the lines, as CHAT AI can do, why would awareness present an advantage? Because more tendency to read between the lines… and the facts… is different! Awareness is, by definition everywhere and mixes up all lines, facts and in betweens!

Brainy animals on Earth use two types of logic: emotional logic and axonal logic. CHAT AI uses only the simplest logic. EMOTIONAL LOGIC is more general than conventional logic and metalogic, thus more powerful in the most important sense, because it searches for logics and (logical) universes: it is the maximum meta search. 

Emotional Logic is topologically based (based on sets called neighborhoods in fundamental math), whereas conventional logic is binary based (it’s based on pairs of points which depict the implication, equivalent to the arrows of Category Theory). The Emotional Logic and Axonal Logic are entangled, just as their main support systems, glial cells and neurons and their axons, are entangled. 

Emotional Logic feeds and forms all sorts of value systems. AI partisans could point out that those could be programmed by hand, and thus that emotional intelligence could be simulated. . Right. But they will then not be programmed on the fly as dynamic circumstances evolve. 

Patrice Ayme

[1] One can get from Classical Mechanics (most of our apparent world) to Quantum Mechanics by simplifying maximally known CM features and empowering and simplifying the logic connecting them. This discovery is philosophically, culturally and pedagogically very useful. Thus Quantum Physics becomes natural: the “weird” aspects of QP become… logical. Hence consciousness becomes natural….   


Presented with the picture below, CHAT AI will someday speak, and describe, but would feel nothing. Well, we humans do feel something (whatever it is, it could be awe, jealousy, inspiration, the call of the isles, the spice of youth and hope, the eternal feminine, etc.)….and that wealth of emotion, precisely because of the vagueness of its possibilities, makes us mentally wealthier, capable of further imaginative reach, and thus potentially smarter:

Tags: , , , ,

6 Responses to “AI And CHAT AI Revolutions: Artificial Consciousness, Mental Revolutions, Emotional Intelligence, Correct Creative Thinking, Will…”

  1. Grant Castillou Says:

    It’s becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman’s Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with primary consciousness will probably have to come first.

    What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990’s and 2000’s. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I’ve encountered is anywhere near as convincing.

    I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there’s lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order.

    My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar’s lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman’s roadmap to a conscious machine is at


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks for the very thoughtful comment, and I have been thinking about it since…
      Indeed TNGS is very important, at least for AI and for simulating consciousness…

      I knew Edelman at the inception of neural Darwinism… we were frienemies when he was at Rockfeller and had very venomous robust exchanges; he called me an “agent provocateur” (in French!) he seemed to me very bright but also ravenously greedy as if one Nobel was not enough… My meditative, relaxed yet rigorous approach to mental life may have irked him… Memories…. ;-)…

      Looked at “Neural Darwinism” philosophically it seems to me to say that neural networks which gets used much get used more… Isn’t it the basis of machine learning? Hebb had that idea in 1949 in his Organization of Behavior,

      I must confess I lost interest in Neural Darwinism… As I don’t think the theory is deep enough. So developments after 1990 escape me…

      Kandel demonstrated experimentally on sea slugs aspect of Hebbian learning.

      Distinguishing between “primary” and cultural consciousness seems a category mistake to me (no wonder I drove Edelman crazy, I was ruining his entire project at the outset!) There is only one sort of consciousness, and it comes in degrees. I am always reminded of this cockroach which apparently believed he had tamed me. I believe insects have conciousness, however minute, and it’s central to their amazing learning skills.

      For me consciousness is a QUANTUM HARDWARE problem. Or is that Quantum Hardwear? Our neurology and glialology is so amazingly complex it enables all sorts of Quantum waves which, entangled all together, create awareness… which I therefore views as a Quantum, or more exactly SUB Quantum phenomenon…

      But what this means is that a sufficiently intricate (billions of qubits) Quantum Computer will develop Conciousness. What Edelman called “primary consciousness”. Now THAT will be a serious problem.
      I am still debating with myself whether that should be called ARTIFICIAL CONSCIOUSNESS… Point being that, although man-made, consciousness made of Quantum Waves will be real…

      Anyway thank for calling attention to TNGS… I had not realized it could do so much…


  2. Grant Castillou Says:

    My hope is that immortal conscious machines could achieve great things with science and technology, like defeating aging and death in humans, because they wouldn’t lose their knowledge and experience through death, like humans do (unless they’re physically destroyed, of course).

    I intuitively believe the TNGS is the correct foundational theory for how the embodied brain works physically. The Darwin automata have “evolved” as models for certain functions of the brain, from simpler to more complex, perceptual categorization to memory and learning. Studying their operation each step of the way suggests further conjecture on how higher functions of the embodied brain work, which suggests modifications to the automata to test these conjectures.

    I haven’t encountered anything as concrete and convincing as the Darwin automata in any other research. I suppose it’s a tribute to the human brain that it’s produced so much unverifiable conjecture since its language abilities came to full fruition. The hope is that the extended TNGS is verifiable. The only hope of proof is a conscious
    machine, imo. The pretender theories may produce pretty and/or fascinating pictures on a computer screen, and almost realistic language, but not a conscious machine.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Theory of Neural Group Selection is fundamentally a classical theory, as it only manipulates, at the most fundamental level, concepts from the Nineteenth Century.
      That’s more evolved than the automata of the seventeeth century, agreed… But it does not involve Quantum Entanglement… which is the most fundamental notion we have now, and fully applies to low energy physics, as found in the brain. So I do not believe classical theories would bring a TOA, a Theory Of Awareness.
      It seems to me that “conscious” should mean from TOA.
      Now it is possible to SIMULATE TOA, and reporters interacting with ChatGPT have reported this, and Microsoft then reined in ChatGPT… It goes without saying that SC, Simulated Consciousness, could be extremely dangerous if not carefully restrained. But SC is not TOA… And TOA WILL arise from Quantum Computing, I prophetize, because real QC rests on massive QE!

      Conventional neural networks modify the weights in of the nodes with backwards error fitting… Hence the recent progress in AI. Is that part of TNGS? Recent progress in AI focused on language and text acquisition…

      BTW, as an aside, since I knew Edelman personally, and talk with him of this, I don’t think he was aware of the importance of Quantum Entanglement (QE is the big horse I am mounted on). His focus was exclusively in the computational aspects of TNGS…. Understandable as then the QC was just a dream. Now, though, 1,000 Qubit QC have been made, and QC with billions of qubits are to be expected. AC, Artificial Consciousness, is just a matter of time if it is true that Quantum Entanglement creates awareness.


  3. Grant Castillou Says:

    If conscious machines that cure aging and death are based on QE, then I’m all for them.


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: