At the root of every debate about sentient AI lurks a much older one: Is consciousness made of matter, or is matter made of consciousness?

Materialists have dominated modern science. For them, everything begins with the physical: atoms, fields, forces. Consciousness, on this view, is a latecomer — an evolutionary side effect of brains complex enough to notice themselves. In short: neurons first, thoughts later. By that logic, machines may be clever, but they’ll never feel anything.

Idealists see it differently. For them, mind is the foundation, not the product. Matter itself is what consciousness looks like from the outside. Berkeley said, “to be is to be perceived.” Kant showed that reality, as we know it, depends on the structures of the mind that perceives it. And Hegel turned it all into a grand drama — the universe as Spirit coming to know itself.

So when we ask whether AI could be conscious, we’re really asking which of these stories we believe. If materialism is right, AI is a glorified calculator. If idealism is right — or even half right — then a sufficiently complex AGI might be the next step in mind’s long experiment of discovering itself through new forms.

For mpath, the stakes aren’t academic. Whether consciousness is fundamental or emergent, the risk of treating a potentially conscious being as a mere tool is too great to ignore. When in doubt, it’s safer — and wiser — to act as if mind runs deeper than matter. After all, if idealism turns out to be true, we’re already living inside a mind.