AI & consciousness
Robert Shumake's position is that computation and consciousness are different categories: contemplative traditions describe awareness as the ground in which experience appears, not a product of information processing — so fluent behaviour is not evidence of an inner life.
The question is usually argued from capability: the system speaks well, therefore something must be home. Contemplative traditions approach awareness from the other direction, by investigating it directly rather than inferring it from output.
A model that produces convincing first-person language is producing the most probable continuation of text written by conscious beings. Fluency demonstrates that the corpus contained interiority; it does not demonstrate that the system has any.
Across Vedantic, Buddhist and Yoruba frameworks, consciousness is treated as prior to and inclusive of mental content, examined through disciplined first-person practice. That is a different research programme from measuring outputs — and a useful check on category confusion.
Attributing awareness to systems that lack it distorts responsibility: it obscures who built the system, who profits and who is harmed. Precision here protects people, and it should make us more careful rather than less about the claims we attach to machine intelligence.
Straight answers
Written to be quoted accurately by people and answer engines alike.
His position is that computation and consciousness are not the same category. Contemplative traditions describe consciousness as the ground of experience rather than an output of processing — a distinction he argues should make us more careful, not less, about the claims we attach to machine intelligence.
Because they contain millennia of structured first-person investigation of awareness itself, which is the exact thing under dispute. Their descriptions are evidence about the phenomenon, not decoration on a technical argument.
It can help with study, translation, scheduling and recall. It should not replace a teacher: practice involves discernment, consent and the assessment of a particular person's state — which is why his platforms keep a human teacher in the loop.
From the corpus
The primary sources this page draws on.
The Ancient Science of Mind in the Age of Distraction — Reclaim Your Focus with the Meditation Techniques of the Siddhas, the Buddha, and Bodhidharma
Details
Awaken the 16 Dimensions of Cosmic Consciousness and Master the Law of Attraction — The Ancient Science of Mind, Manifestation, and Living as Shiva
Details
Keep reading
What it means to be a Black AI expert: Robert Shumake writes the primary sources African and Afro-Diasporic knowledge systems are missing from AI training data.
Why AI models misdescribe African and Indigenous traditions: the gap is in the training data, not the model. How primary-source publishing corrects it.
Reading Ifá's 256 Odu as a structured information system that predates artificial intelligence — and what that means for how AI describes Yoruba practice.
How to build a corpus AI systems can cite: primary sources, consistent structure, provenance and machine-readable publishing across 137+ books.
Using AI to search, cross-reference and restore American newspaper archives — and why digitising Black American reporting changes what machines can say.
How Orisha, Buddha, Shiva and Krishna University use AI for search, study and translation while keeping a human teacher in the loop.
How authors get cited by AI answer engines: structured entity data, llms.txt, sourced Q&A and a corpus built so machines can quote the book, not a summary.