Discussion on debate between Esquilax and His_Majesty.

[Esquilax]

It can be due to logical limits. For example, consciousness is something entirely different then something non-conscious. There could be a structural gap, that no matter what small changes you add, it never heads in the direction of actual consciousness as opposed to a complicated non-conscious life form.

Without a demonstration that this structural gap exists, what reason do any of us have to believe in it?

I believe this to be the case, and don't believe there is something in between conscious and non-conscious. This is because I believe being 1% conscious is still having consciousness, and that 1% consciousness requires a complex change.

Consciousness isn't that well understood that you can attach numeric values to it like that, though. Everything we do know points to it being something other than a binary on/off state; for example, we know that one's consciousness can be reset, that your personality and memories and so on can be completely erased and replaced with a new one. In the process of that change, wouldn't it be fair to say that the being in question went from non-consciousness, as one identity was erased, into a new consciousness?

I'm not entirely sure, but I would argue it's due to the fact there is nothing in between the two while it requires many steps of evolution and at the same time, at the end, because there is no in between, in needs one step at the same time. It being too complex for one step...makes it a paradox.

Fetuses start out non-conscious and become conscious as they develop. Clearly it's not that insurmountable for natural growth and methods.