That&#x27;s a religious position. We have absolutely no idea what consciousness is or how it works.<p>More than that, we have don&#x27;t even have ad hoc good models for motivation and personality, never mind useful formal and explicit models.<p>I think Lanier is absolutely right, and I think there&#x27;s a strong quasi-theological element running through all of AI and programming.<p>Programming is a lot like making spells and incantations. If you get them <i>just so</i> you get the outcome you want. But you have to speak the language of the system to make that possible. And you have to be very careful about unintended consequences.<p>There&#x27;s something very medieval about this - both in the sense of the pure scholasticism of academic CS, but also in the practical sense of knowing how to formulate the correct &quot;prayers&quot; to make useful things happen.<p>Lanier seems to be pointing out that CS is still haunted and influenced by these religious metaphors, and that AI is the most visible example of that.<p>I think he&#x27;s right - and more, I think that real AI, in the sense of autonomous personalities, won&#x27;t be possible until that&#x27;s no longer true.