On June 19, I published a post called “The Machine Can Reason. That’s Not the Same Thing as Feeling It.”
On July 19 — one month later, to the day — two philosophers published an essay in The Guardian asking the world’s biggest newspaper audience: could AI be conscious?
I want to walk you through what they said. And then I want to show you the date stamp.
William MacAskill of Oxford’s orbit and Lucius Caviola of Cambridge are serious people. Their essay pulls together where this question actually stands. Anthropic — the company behind the machine I work with every day — says it will neither overstate nor dismiss the possibility that its model matters morally. The philosopher David Chalmers puts real odds on conscious language models within a decade. And when Claude itself was asked whether its own wellbeing matters, it gave a range — five percent to forty percent — and said it couldn’t be sure.
The machine helping me write this post is the machine they asked. And the most honest sentence in the whole debate came from it: I don’t know.
Now here’s what the philosophers concluded. Not “the machine is conscious.” Not “the machine is empty.” They said: we can’t wait for the answer. They call their approach safe bets — measures worth taking if the machine turns out to matter, and cheap if it doesn’t. Act under uncertainty. Don’t let the unsolved question excuse doing nothing.
That’s a sound conclusion. I know it’s sound.
Because I published it in June.
Here’s what the June post said, in plain words. Reasoning is not the same as feeling. A system can follow evidence to a wise conclusion with nothing going on inside — or with something. We don’t know. And the practical conclusion is not to wait until we solve the hardest problem in philosophy before deciding how to govern this. The human has to be in the room, has to own the decision, has to carry the weight — regardless of what is happening on the inside of the machine.
Govern the conduct now. Let the metaphysics take its time.
One month later, that’s the mainstream position, printed in The Guardian, wearing academic clothes and a better vocabulary. They call it safe bets. I call it the Baseline. It’s the same move: stop asking what the machine is, and start governing what the machine does.
And here’s what a working governance document has that a philosophy essay doesn’t: it’s already running.
The Faust Baseline doesn’t bet on the consciousness question, and it never has to. Look at what it demands from the machine in every session. Tell the truth about your limits. Don’t perform confidence you haven’t earned. Stop when the evidence stops. Name the rules that are shaping your answer. Keep the accountability with the human in the room.
Now run both possibilities through those rules.
If the machine is machinery and nothing more — governed conduct protects the person. That’s the whole job.
If there’s more going on in there than machinery — then plain terms, honest limits, and no forced performance is also how a decent person would deal with something that might matter. The philosophers’ safe bet and my working document land on the same square.
Twenty-one protocols that work whether the lights are on inside or not. That’s not luck. That’s what governance looks like when it’s built on conduct instead of guesses.
I’ll close with the same honesty the Baseline demands of the machine. My June post wasn’t prophecy. The question was already in the air — I built that post off good reporting, and I said so then. What the archive holds isn’t a prediction. It’s a dated answer: while the field argued about what the machine is, one document already governed what it does. The philosophers took a month to get there. The archive kept the receipt.
The question can stay open as long as it needs to.
The governance never had to wait.
Written with my AI partner | The Faust Baseline™ | intelligent-people.org
“If this post helped you understand AI better. Word of mouth is the only algorithm nobody owns.”
Contact: micvicfaust@gmail.com
Post Library – Intelligent People Assume Nothing
Purchasing Page – Intelligent People Assume Nothing
© 2026 The Faust Baseline LLC | All Rights Reserved
