evolution

[Angrboda]

Sure, I can go with that too?  What we're talking about when we talk about our consciousness is both more than and different from what a minimally self aware machine is doing.  It still remains the case that even a minimal self awareness -a machines minimal self awareness- has quantifiable advantages.

Because they are different, consciousness in animals does not exist in machines, and consciousness in machines does not exist in animals. For the analogy to even get off the ground the two have to be at minimum species within the same class, and they are not. Thus any attempt to reason about one based upon the other is practically designed to fail.

Is there any particular reason that you think being able to attend to attention, clearly advantageous anytime and anywhere we care to look, is -not- advantageous to human reproduction and survival?  How about possessing a self image?  Do you think it might be possible or useful for a human being to be able to attend to the details of it's self image..and, where applicable, repair or improve our physical bodies in order to attract a mate?  Is this not an ability A?

Nothing you have presented gives us any more cause to believe it is in A than that it is in B. You've presented a false analogy and the suggestion that a person lacking consciousness would be less well equipped to survive a challenging environment. I think I can safely bet that experiment hasn't been done in addition to pointing out that we at present don't possess the science to perform said experiment. So you've presented a false argument and the results of an experiment that you not only haven't performed but can't perform. Am I supposed to be dumbstruck by your complete inability to make a cogent argument?