New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Is Consciousness the Hallmark of Life?

As AI grows more fluent in mimicking human empathy, language and memory, we’re left asking: If a machine can fake awareness so well, what exactly is the real thing?

Cover of The Conscious Brain special edition of Scientific American

Scientific American

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

More than half a billion people around the world have downloaded artificial-intelligence chatbot companion apps such as Xiaoice and Replika. These virtual confidantes can provide empathy, support and, sometimes, deep relationships. Chatbots, of course, aren’t conscious—they just feel that way to users, who often become emotionally attached to them. As AI grows more fluent in mimicking human empathy, language and memory, we’re left to confront an uneasy problem: If a machine can fake awareness so well, what exactly is the real thing? It's a deceptively simple question—one that scientists, philosophers and even neuroscientists still struggle to answer: What is consciousness?

Unlike other scientific phenomena, consciousness cannot be observed directly; one can observe behavior or brain activity but not the subjective experience itself. Whether human awareness is a “stage” where inputs compete for our attention or a unified system processing information all at once is still up for debate. In fact, our reality may stem from subjective internal experiences, such as colors or tastes, that arise because of consciousness. Behavior may also feed this experience, as suggested by a thought experiment about pain-pleasure invert “philosophical zombies” described here.

As complicated as this mystery seems, human cognition operates at a relatively slow, fixed speed of roughly 10 bits per second for tasks such as remembering, making decisions and imagining. Sudden insights can bubble to the surface while unconscious operations churn away. And people’s brain waves predictably sync up as the individuals interact, which is perhaps an evolutionary adaptation that helps us bond. Automatic processes suggest our minds operate without our conscious involvement, but that’s not the whole story.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Much goes on in the unconscious mind. It turns out dreams can be a bellwether of cognitive disorder. And famous nappers such as Thomas Edison have believed they could manipulate their sleep to spark creativity. Our era of constant surveillance may cause cognitive changes without our knowledge. In people who are in comas, the mind might be aware but trapped.

Reality can shift for people with illnesses that arise from complex interactions of genetics and environment, such as schizophrenia. Scientists can now identify early biomarkers to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease, but these tools raise ethical and social concerns. A rare neurological condition called Alice in Wonderland syndrome appears to warp a person’s perception of bodies and time, especially in children. And sometimes a rift develops between the world and a mind, a stark reminder that awareness is malleable. Surprising activity in dying brains can temporarily restore neural function.

AI will certainly continue to advance, becoming better at imitating the hallmark behavior of conscious beings and perhaps even someday achieving artificial general intelligence. But as cognitive scientist Anil K. Seth tells reporter George Musser, “Consciousness is not a matter of being smart. It’s equally a matter of being alive.” So far that’s a claim that only humans, among other creatures on Earth, can make.

Andrea Gawrylewski is chief newsletter editor at Scientific American. She writes the daily Today in Science newsletter and oversees all other newsletters at the magazine. In addition, she manages all special editions and in the past was the editor for Scientific American Mind, Scientific American Space & Physics and Scientific American Health & Medicine. Gawrylewski got her start in journalism at the Scientist magazine, where she was a features writer and editor for "hot" research papers in the life sciences. She spent more than six years in educational publishing, editing books for higher education in biology, environmental science and nutrition. She holds a master's degree in earth science and a master's degree in journalism, both from Columbia University, home of the Pulitzer Prize.

More by Andrea Gawrylewski
SA Special Editions Vol 34 Issue 3sThis article was published with the title “Hallmark of Life” in SA Special Editions Vol. 34 No. 3s (), p. 1
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican092025-5Cjzpvvu0oJgJlu44QF56S

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe