There are a lot of people out there who have their own versions of definitions but again there’s no consensus, I personally do not throw my hat in with any written definition other than my own and I’m hesitant to share that.

Saying that “dualists have an answer” doesn’t actually solve it if there’s no shared definition

Much like the term “intelligence” has no consensus, so being able to determine what is “artificial” versus “not artificial” intelligence continues to be this philosophical or almost religious position.

Creating a consensus on what the term “consciousness” means mechanically, would effectively destabilize the entirety of society. Imagine if the consensus definition of consciousness is applicable to all mammals. That means that there would be valid justification then to make it illegal to harm any mammal. You can see why this would incentivize people to not come to consensus on these things.

So in my perspective it is not socially feasible to find consensus and therefore a way to test it because religious leader might have incompatible definitions of consciousness than let’s say an epilepsy doctor.

As much as a scientists want to actually make progress in the world ultimately what holds us back are somewhat arbitrary social conventions because reasons.