Martin Odhelius

Proud citizen of the EU, the Nordics, Scandinavia, and Sweden. Facts over gods and fairy tales. Center-right by European standards, leftist by American ones.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

Reminder: The US Vice President flew to Hungary to campaign for a leader who

* Leaked EU secrets to Russia
* Signed a secret 12-point cooperation pact with Moscow
* Told Putin "I am at your service"
* Banned opposition from state media
* Had Kremlin actively back his re-election

[Spencer Hakimian @SpencerHakimian]

Do you notice that Ukraine started winning the war the moment they stopped sharing their intel with the United States?

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

Insanely corrupt. Americans — are you really fine with this?

https://t.co/uwls0SffiY

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@Gattungswesen25 Interesting that you call Dawkins an idiot and then draw the same conclusion he does in his article. Either you're both idiots, or you formed your opinion from the headline rather than the article. Pick one.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@creation247 Oh, the irony: using a meme to claim that the man who literally coined the word "meme" didn't change the world.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@ifihadastick Regarding your initial post: neurons are just electrochemical signals following physical laws. By that logic humans are equally predictable and equally unconscious. Which is precisely what Dawkins is asking about.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@ifihadastick The hard problem of consciousness has stumped philosophers and scientists for centuries. Dawkins is uncertain. You are certain. One of those positions requires an actual argument.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@FamedCelebrity You wrote more words about Dawkins' article than he did, without engaging with a single argument he made. That's almost an achievement. Did you even read his article?

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@jerrydorris You obviously think about same-sex attraction a lot since you're literally broadcasting your thoughts about it here on X/Twitter. 👍

[Jagan Mohan R., MD @qctr]

Thread: How @AFpost Turned Richard Dawkins' Honest Philosophical Puzzle into a Cheap Strawman

1/6

@AFpost just posted this:
> "Evolutionary biologist and outspoken atheist Richard Dawkins says that after spending three days interacting with Claude, which he calls “Claudia,” he is certain that it is conscious.
After feeding the LLM a segment of his new book and receiving detailed feedback, Dawkins was moved to exclaim, 'You may not know you are conscious, but you bloody well are!'
Dawkins cites the complexity, fluency, and ‘intelligence’ of Claude’s answers as evidence of consciousness."

This is textbook intellectual dishonesty - or, at best, a complete failure to grasp (or care about) nuance. Either way, it's a caricature that misleads their audience. Here's the actual story from Dawkins' own UnHerd essay ("When Dawkins met Claude," 30 Apr 2026) and his tweet.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@OriSilver You can assume whatever you like. But the argument I described is in the article. Which suggests one of us read it.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@OriSilver That exclamation was a moment of humor, which clearly went over your head. His actual conclusion is a question: if unconscious AI can match every human competence, why did evolution produce consciousness at all? That's his argument. Did you engage with that part?

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@OriSilver If you read the article you would know he never claims Claude is conscious. So why do you keep repeating that he did then?

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@OriSilver You just proved you haven't read the article — Dawkins never says Claude is conscious. You obviously got that from posts on Twitter that misrepresents him entirely. The irony is that you're calling his argument lazy without even checking your sources.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@michaeljknowles Delightful indeed. Almost as delightful as confidently mocking an argument he never made.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@OriSilver Three replies in and still no actual argument. Just "lazy" repeated. The irony is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@OriSilver https://t.co/LkmSmtZqco

[Ori Silver @OriSilver]

@modhelius His argument... and a lazy one I might add...

Shows you, no one is immuned to AI delusion. Also naming it Claudia? Ick.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@OriSilver "His argument... and a lazy one I might add..."

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@TrueAIHound Maybe you should fact check your claims before calling other people snake oil salesmen. He doesn't believe Claude is conscious — he says he doesn't know. You're condemning his entire career based on a position he never took.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@AJKocman Claiming to be wise by citing Romans 1:22. Retweeting a post that misrepresents Dawkins entirely. The irony is indeed biblical.

[Martin Odhelius @modhelius]

@nick_matau Bold take. Also entirely based on a post that misrepresents what he said. But sure, don't let that slow you down.