A scary chat with ChatGPT about latest NDE account in NDE thread

The "emergence" of the sense of self and when it happens is a problematic thing without a universal agreement.
I also lean towards the skeptical side, but for me, while AI lacks certain limits of biological organisms, this alone doesn't make a compelling case for computational minds. (Eliminative materialist positions, such as Graziano's AST, argue that consciousness being "ethereal and mysterious" advances their views because it's a imperfection of this cognitive process according to them however.)

I'd say emergence is just nonsense. Adding any infinite number of Nothing doesn't magically create Something, which in the end is what the Materialist faith asks of us by having a definition of matter that is very unclear save for lacking any mental content.

As Sam Harris would say:

We can say the right words, of course—“consciousness emerges from unconscious information processing.” We can also say “Some squares are as round as circles” and “2 plus 2 equals 7.” But are we really thinking these things all the way through? I don’t think so.

Consciousness—the sheer fact that this universe is illuminated by sentience—is precisely what unconsciousness is not. And I believe that no description of unconscious complexity will fully account for it. It seems to me that just as “something” and “nothing,” however juxtaposed, can do no explanatory work, an analysis of purely physical processes will never yield a picture of consciousness. However, this is not to say that some other thesis about consciousness must be true. Consciousness may very well be the lawful product of unconscious information processing. But I don’t know what that sentence means—and I don’t think anyone else does either.

That last bit - 'Consciousness may very well be the lawful product of unconscious information processing' - seems to be throwing a bone to his fellow atheists who are materialists, but I see no reason to take it seriously.