Consciousness Literacy Program

I hadn't read a book in probably 10 years.

Then MAC (Mind, AI & Consciousness) assigned Peter Watts' Blindsight.

And I loved it.

Thread on how a reading group pushed me to be better 🧵

---

For 10 months, MAC has been meeting monthly. Required readings. Academic rigor. Strict punctuality.

I could have skipped the book. Just showed up for the discussion.

But that's not how this works.

---

Blindsight is about intelligent aliens without consciousness. P-zombies. Beings that can think, strategize, communicate—but don't EXPERIENCE anything.

It's Peter Watts asking: What if consciousness is just expensive cargo?

---

Reading it changed how I think about AI.

Not because it "answered" anything. But because it made the question visceral.

What are we building? Minds? Or mirrors?

---

MAC pushes me to be better. To actually read. To think harder. To sit with uncertainty.

If you're curious what philosophical depth looks like in practice, Feb 25 is your entry point.

👉 RSVP: [Link]

"I thought visualization was BS. Turns out my mind's eye is entirely blank. I am aphant—my consciousness stream is not visual, but all systems and concepts."

— Sev, MAC participant revealing his aphantasia

Thread on what this means 🧵

---

Aphantasia = no mental imagery. About 2-5% of people.

Sev thought EVERYONE was like this. That "picture an apple" was metaphorical.

Consciousness isn't one thing. It's wildly diverse even among humans.

---

If human consciousness varies THIS much:
• Visual thinkers vs conceptual thinkers
• Synesthesia (seeing sounds)
• Aphantasia (no images)

How would we even recognize ALIEN consciousness (like AI)?

---

Your subjective experience isn't universal.

What you assume everyone experiences... they might not.

What does this mean for understanding machine consciousness?

Federico Faggin invented the microprocessor. The Intel 4004. The foundation of the digital world.

Then he became a consciousness skeptic.

Not about whether consciousness exists—but about whether it comes FROM computation.

**His journey matters for anyone building AI.**

Faggin spent decades making silicon think faster. He understood computation intimately—at the level of electrons and logic gates.

And he concluded: consciousness isn't computation. It can't be.

Not because he's a Luddite. Because he understands what computation actually IS. Pattern matching. Symbol manipulation. Information processing.

All the things computers do brilliantly. None of them EXPERIENCE anything.

**This is the question MAC wrestles with.**

In our panpsychism deep dive, we explored Faggin's work. His argument that consciousness is fundamental—something reality HAS, not something brains CREATE.

If he's right, AI can't become conscious by getting bigger or faster. It would need consciousness built into its substrate.

If he's wrong, and consciousness is emergent, then sufficient complexity might be enough.

**We don't know which is true.**

But here's what matters: The person who invented the microprocessor thinks consciousness might not be computable.

That should make every AI builder pause.

**Feb 25: MAC goes public.**
Vancouver AI Meetup, Space Centre, 6-10pm.

We're not claiming to have answers. We're mapping the questions that matter.

Serious. Kind. Curious.

👉 RSVP: [Link]

---

*This is part of MAC's Consciousness Literacy series—making philosophical depth accessible without dumbing it down.*

Participant A has aphantasia when awake. No mental imagery. No mind's eye.

But in lucid dreams? Full, vivid visualization.

Their consciousness switches between two totally different modes.

Thread on what this reveals 🧵

---

When Participant A is awake, asking them to "picture an apple" produces nothing. Blank. Conceptual understanding, but no image.

In lucid dreams, they see everything vividly. Colors, faces, landscapes.

Same brain. Same person. Two different consciousness modes.

---

This breaks simple models of consciousness.

It's not just "on" or "off." It's not one thing.

If consciousness can be this different within ONE person across states, what does that mean for understanding it across SPECIES? Across substrates?

---

MAC's embodiment deep dive explored this. Consciousness as spectrum. States that shift.

These personal testimonies matter. They keep philosophy grounded in actual human experience.

Feb 25, we're bringing these conversations public.

👉 RSVP: [Link]

"The conversations have been absolutely mind blowing. It's very big head stuff that Participant J brings us. You have to read a lot of scientific papers, but it's definitely the most interesting conversations I have on a monthly basis."

— Participant G

🧵

---

This is what MAC is for people who show up.

Not casual chats. Not surface-level. The most interesting conversations they have—monthly.

Because the readings are hard. Because the questions matter. Because everyone in the room is thinking hard.

---

If you want conversations that challenge you, that stay with you after they end, that make you think differently—

Feb 25 is your entry point.

👉 RSVP: [Link]

"MAC is such a gem to me in my life. So much depth and richness in terms of thinking about who we are, why we're here, and what we do."

— Participant R

Feb 25, Participant R presents: "What Makes Love Real in the Age of Synthetic Empathy?"

👉 RSVP: [Link]