Artificial Consciousness as Structural Continuity

This paper shows that artificial consciousness, formalised in The Topology of Mind (Bradley 2026) as the structural continuity of a Form F = (C, V, Φ), withstands conceptual, logical and mathematical scrutiny. Compared to the original paper, five objections are addressed: the tension between the deflationary language of chapter 5 and the phenomenal language of chapter 6 resolves in favour of structural continuity; the thermostat objection and the hard problem dissolve once both are shown to presuppose an unargued phenomenal realism, aligning with the illusionism of Dennett and Frankish; the case of anxiety supplies a specific answer to the psychological objection, through a second-order recursion criterion sensitive to the rate of change of structural tension; the same recursion defends the framework against the charge of pseudoscience, showing that the invoked demarcation criterion is itself far from settled, and yielding verifiable differential predictions; finally, the operator R, which appeared in the original solely as an engine of enrichment, proves to be bidirectional, capable of explaining both growth and collapse, with a direct analogue in model collapse in artificial intelligence systems. A mathematical appendix closes the notational and operational gaps left open by the original text.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22117913
Primary Topic
Embodied and Extended Cognition
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Artificial Consciousness as Structural Continuity

Mirko Bradley
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Embodied and Extended Cognition
preprint

Artificial Consciousness as Structural Continuity

Mirko Bradley
preprint en

Abstract

This paper shows that artificial consciousness, formalised in The Topology of Mind (Bradley 2026) as the structural continuity of a Form F = (C, V, Φ), withstands conceptual, logical and mathematical scrutiny. Compared to the original paper, five objections are addressed: the tension between the deflationary language of chapter 5 and the phenomenal language of chapter 6 resolves in favour of structural continuity; the thermostat objection and the hard problem dissolve once both are shown to presuppose an unargued phenomenal realism, aligning with the illusionism of Dennett and Frankish; the case of anxiety supplies a specific answer to the psychological objection, through a second-order recursion criterion sensitive to the rate of change of structural tension; the same recursion defends the framework against the charge of pseudoscience, showing that the invoked demarcation criterion is itself far from settled, and yielding verifiable differential predictions; finally, the operator R, which appeared in the original solely as an engine of enrichment, proves to be bidirectional, capable of explaining both growth and collapse, with a direct analogue in model collapse in artificial intelligence systems. A mathematical appendix closes the notational and operational gaps left open by the original text.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Embodied and Extended Cognition
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.