Abstract
The marker approach is taken as best practice for answering the distribution question: Which animals are conscious? However, the methodology can be used to increase confidence in animals many presume to be unconscious, including C. elegans, leading to a trilemma: accept the worms as conscious; reject the specific markers; or reject the marker methodology for answering the distribution question. I defend the third option and argue that answering the distribution question requires a secure theory of consciousness. Accepting the hypothesis all animals are conscious will promote research leading to secure theory, which is needed to create reliable consciousness tests for animals and AIs. Rather than asking the distribution question, we should shift to the dimensions question: How are animals conscious?
That is the Buddhist position. All animals are sentient and sentience extends beyond earthly animals and beyond the human realm. I personally think and act as if everything is sentient or conscious. If you treat all things with respect and even talk to them or commune with them, life is richer and provides more feedback and deeper meaning in wondrous ways. Besides, it’s not possible to separate our sentience from everything else that is. Just because that’s a lot to take in doesn’t mean it’s not that way. ABN
American Buddhist Net 