Given Wiblin is repeatedly saying he isn't sure about the answer and this is only about the argument, I'm on board with it until near the end, where I diverge is this:

> Common sense says says Claude has more in common with a human brain than Microsoft Word or a text file. Common sense is right. So the prima facie case for Claude being conscious is naturally stronger (even if you think it's still weak in absolute terms).

"Common sense" is a cognitive stop sign, not an argument. What seems like "it is common sense this is true" to one person is often "it is common sense this is false" to someone else.

Given the rest of Wiblin's arguments, I feel like he ought to have known that. One could even, if you will forgive a deliberate irony, say that knowing better than using the phrase is itself "common sense".