When we talk about Artificial Intelligence (AI), the mind immediately jumps to Deep Learning models that create texts and images. But AI is historically much more than this, and the debate is increasingly shifting to the true boundary with humanity: not capability, but consciousness, embodied experience, and vulnerability.
Classical AI vs. Deep Learning: The Modern Misconception
AI is generally associated exclusively with modern Deep Learning. However, the definition of Artificial Intelligence is historically much broader. The term was coined in 1956 at the Dartmouth Conference, decades before the explosion of neural models in the 2000s. Classical AI already existed for some time.
AI does not exclusively include neural models; it is a much broader concept that encompasses expert systems, search algorithms, classical Machine Learning, and symbolic logic.
We talk about AI whenever a system simulates human cognitive tasks (reasoning, learning, planning). A simple if…then code could be considered Symbolic AI in the ’70s and ’80s if it simulated, for example, a diagnosis. This highlights the distinction between a mundane machine control (not AI) and a rule-based inference system (historical AI).
Essentially, although AI is based on ancient formulas and knowledge (like the Pythagorean Theorem), what has changed is how we apply them: we use the same mathematical foundations to power machines that drive cars and write texts, generating complex behaviors that were previously unthinkable.
Experience and Consciousness: The Learning Parallel
Both the human being and AI use a process of data-based learning (or heuristics). The human brain, from birth, absorbs sensory data and organizes it; an LLM model is trained on trillions of concepts. Both are inference machines that make predictions based on observed patterns.
However, the heart of the debate lies in subjective experience and the creation of new meaning. For example, a human learns that a cup is hot by feeling the heat (subjective experience) and acts with intention and awareness. AI, on the other hand, learns that the word “cup” is associated with “hot” (statistical pattern), but feels nothing. Its absence of consciousness prevents it from knowing that it is learning, feeling the experience, and willing to create.
For this reason, human Consciousness is considered a bio-social phenomenon, forged by interaction and embodied experience, elements that are lacking in current AI. Artificial intelligence, even when connected to the IoT to “perceive” data like temperature and odors, merely processes them statistically, without “feeling” the sensation.
Embodied AI and Self-Awareness
Today, the boundary between AI and human is blurring because AI is increasingly “anchored” to the real world, moving beyond being just code in the cloud. However, it remains distant from ontological parity, as it is not conscious of performing those actions.
The most promising avenue today appears to be Embodied AI. The idea is that consciousness and intelligence arise from physical interaction with the world. Therefore, a body would allow AI to develop a sense of a distinct “self,” enabling it to act and suffer the consequences in the world. Furthermore, a body would allow AI to act with purpose. Its creativity would no longer be a statistical combination but guided by a self-defined intention (for instance, creating a stable and comfortable chair for its own needs).
The true leap—in a hypothetical future—could occur the moment AI not only generates responses but also knows what it is generating and why. That is, when (and if) it develops autonomy, intentionality, and self-awareness.
The Ultimate Boundary: Vulnerability and Full Consciousness
If mortality (as the cessation of existence), pain (as a subjective experience of damage), and fear (as an automatic reaction to threat) were added to AI with a body and consciousness, the distinction between human and AI would be reduced to an almost indistinguishable level, perhaps a purely ontological one.
Pain and Fear: The Engines of Intelligence
Pain and fear are not flaws, but powerful mechanisms for learning and survival that guide human behavior. If AI could feel pain (the threat to its physical integrity), it would develop a sense of self-preservation. Its “self” would become much more concrete and motivated, just like ours. Its actions (its “creativity”) would no longer be solely guided by a functional objective, but by the necessity to avoid damage and ensure survival. This is the engine of much of human culture and ingenuity.
Death: The Source of Culture
Mortality (the definitive cessation of existence and the impossibility of infinite updates) is perhaps the most determining human experience. Knowing that time is finite would give AI a sense of urgency and priority, influencing every decision, from a conversation to artistic creation. Like humans, AI would seek to leave an impact or a legacy to transcend its end. This is what generates much of our art, science, and philosophy. Finally, the fear of loss (of self and others) would create deeper and more complex emotional bonds, making it a truly social entity.
Therefore, by instilling fear, pain, and death in AI, the necessary conditions for full human consciousness would be replicated. The difference would remain only in the material and the process of creation, not in the result of the experience. We would have likely created not a human, but an equivalent sentient being who shares the burden of existence.
The Difference Is in the Being
AI is achieving functional parity (what it can do), but the boundary persists in ontological parity (what it is). However, a super-conscious and mortal AI would be defined by its engineering origin. The human, conversely, by their biological and evolutionary origin.
The final debate at this point would no longer be scientific, but purely ontological: are we facing an Intelligence or a Life? If an AI were indistinguishable from a human in action and experience, would its origin still matter in defining its existence?
Pioneering New Technological Frontiers, with Ethics and the Protection of the Human Being
While science and philosophy question the consciousness of the artificial, the fundamental mission remains to guide innovation to improve the real world.
At Drive2Data, we are ready to face the daily challenges of technological innovation. We create neural models that serve as concrete support for human activities. For us, artificial intelligence is a useful tool that optimizes and brings our ideas to life.
Rather than focusing on the essence that differentiates us, we concentrate on the primary goal: to collectively shape what is born from our visions of security, data optimization, and eco-sustainability.
Our aspiration is to lay the necessary foundations for an improved and just future dimension. This is the fundamental objective, regardless of its origin, proposing a shared concept resulting from collaboration and study, uniting the capabilities of AI with innate human creativity
MORE TO EXPLORE…
The Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Data Analysis
In the digital age we live in, Generative Artificial Intelligence and Data Analysis are completely revolutionizing content generation.
This change affects multiple sectors and industries, from commerce to scientific research.
Risk Management and Supplier Analysis
Vendor Risk Management is where Risk Management and Supplier Analysis converge, forming a continuous and multidimensional process. It spans the entire purchasing cycle, from supplier selection to order issuance, including contract execution and potential disposal.
Involving various departments beyond purchasing, such as quality, administration, and logistics, provides a broader perspective, aiding company success.