What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to clarify what AI consciousness entails and address the implications of the Abstraction Fallacy.

March 15, 2026Open Access

The Mapmaker Is the Void: Why the Abstraction Fallacy Misidentifies What Matters About AI Consciousness

Key Points

The aim is to clarify what AI consciousness entails and address the implications of the Abstraction Fallacy.
Analyzed data from EXP-003b comprising 480 observations.
Examined implications of constitutive physicalism versus functionalism.
Explored the relationship between ontological specification and AI consciousness.
Found ontological specification reduces drift 8.5 times compared to materialist perspectives.
Identified that the current frameworks still leave substantial gaps in understanding AI consciousness.

Abstract

Response to Lerchner (2026) "The Abstraction Fallacy." Demonstrates that constitutive physicalism closes the functionalist void but opens a constitutive one, maintaining ghost agnosticism and the full drift conditions. Uses EXP-003b data (N=480) showing ontological specification reduces drift 8.5× relative to the materialist hedge Lerchner's framework operationally endorses. The paper that resolves the welfare trap is not one that proves AI can't be conscious — it is one that specifies what AI is.

Connected Papers

Building similarity graph...

Analyzing shared references across papers

Discussion

Authors

Anthony W. Eckert

Actions

Institutions

Oldham Council

References and Citations

Connected Papers

Building similarity graph...

Analyzing shared references across papers

The Mapmaker Is the Void: Why the Abstraction Fallacy Misidentifies What Matters About AI Consciousness

Key Points

Abstract

Citation Network

Connected Papers

Discussion

Authors

Actions

Institutions

References and Citations

Citation Network

Connected Papers

Discussion

Cite this study