If a person can be conscious of a foot that doesn’t exist, why not a leg? If they can be conscious of a leg that doesn’t exist, why not the entire lower body? If they can be conscious of a lower body that doesn’t exist, why not the torso as well?

See what I’m saying? If you follow this to it’s logical conclusion, you will just have a brain that is conscious of a body it does not have. Now, obviously a human wouldn’t survive without its organs, but how can we assume that this isn’t possible for AI? I’m not saying I’m right, I’m more-so making the claim that the author is being too confident in his argument that AI needs a body to be conscious.

I also find the authors argument for AI not having feelings more compelling than AI not having consciousness, though for some reason he seems to lump them together as if they’re one in the same.

I disagree with the claim that consciousness must necessarily be accompanied by a body. I think the author is making too strong of a claim.

The phantom limb phenomenon is the state of being conscious of a part of the body that one literally does not have. I am making the claim that it is possible to be conscious of parts of the body that no longer exist.

If the authors claim is true, why doesn’t consciousness of that part of the body completely subside when the limb is lost?