As AI—and the ethical debate surrounding it—accelerates, scientists argue that understanding consciousness is now more urgent than ever.
Researchers writing in Frontiers in Science warn that advances in AI and neurotechnology are outpacing our understanding of consciousness—with potentially serious ethical consequences.
They argue that explaining how consciousness arises—which could one day lead to scientific tests to detect it—is now an urgent scientific and ethical priority. Such an understanding would bring major implications for AI, prenatal policy, animal welfare, medicine, mental health, law, and emerging neurotechnologies such as brain–computer interfaces.
“Consciousness science is no longer a purely philosophical pursuit. It has real implications for every facet of society—and for understanding what it means to be human,” said lead author Prof Axel Cleeremans from Université Libre de Bruxelles. “Understanding consciousness is one of the most substantial challenges of 21st-century science—and it’s now urgent due to advances in AI and other technologies.
“If we become able to create consciousness—even accidentally—it would raise immense ethical challenges and even existential risk” added Cleeremans, a European Research Council (ERC) grantee.
Sentience test
Consciousness—the state of being aware of our surroundings and of ourselves—remains one of science’s deepest mysteries. Despite decades of research, there is still no consensus over how subjective experience arises from biological processes.
While scientists have made progress in identifying the brain areas and neural processes that are involved in consciousness, there is still controversy about which areas and processes are necessary for consciousness, and how exactly they contribute to it. Some even wonder if this is the right way to consider the challenge.
This new review explores where consciousness science stands today, where it could go next, and what might happen if humans succeed in understanding or even creating consciousness—whether in machines or in lab-grown brain-like systems like “brain organoids.”
The authors say that tests for consciousness—evidence-based ways to judge whether a being or a system is aware—could help identify awareness in patients with brain injury or dementia, and determine when it arises in fetuses, animals, brain organoids, or even AI.
While this would mark a major scientific breakthrough, they warn it would also raise profound ethical and legal challenges about how to treat any system shown to be conscious.
“Progress in consciousness science will reshape how we see ourselves and our relationship to both artificial intelligence and the natural world,” said co-author Prof Anil Seth from the University of Sussex and ERC grantee. “The question of consciousness is ancient—but it’s never been more urgent than now.”
Wide implications
A better understanding of consciousness could:
The authors call for a coordinated, evidence-based approach to consciousness. For example, using adversarial collaborations, rival theories are pitted against each other in experiments co-designed by their proponents. ”We need more team science to break theoretical silos and overcome existing biases and assumptions,” said co-author Prof Liad Mudrik. “This step has the potential to move the field forward.”
The researchers also urge more attention to phenomenology (what consciousness feels like) to complement the study of what it does (its function).
“Cooperative efforts are essential to make progress—and to ensure society is prepared for the ethical, medical, and technological consequences of understanding, and perhaps creating, consciousness,” said Cleeremans.
NOTES TO EDITORS
Higher-order theories suggest that a thought or feeling represented in some brain states only becomes conscious when there is another brain state that “points at it”, signaling that “this is what I am conscious of now”. They align with the intuition that being conscious of something means being aware of one’s own mental state
Integrated information theory argues that a system is conscious if its parts are highly connected and integrated in very specific ways defined by the theory, in line with the idea that every conscious experience is both unified and highly informative.
Predictive processing theory suggests that what we experience is the brain’s best guess about the world, based on predictions of what something will look or feel like, checked against sensory signals.
Please link to the original Frontiers in Science article in your reporting: “Consciousness science: where are we, where are we going, and what if we get there?” by Axel Cleeremans, Liad Mudrik, and Anil K. Seth, published 30 October 2025 in Frontiers in Science: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/science/articles/10.3389/fsci.2025.1546279/full [The link will go live with the full paper once the embargo lifts.]
-ENDS-
Frontiers in Science
Systematic review
Not applicable
Consciousness science: where are we, where are we going, and what if we get there?
30-Oct-2025