To my knowledge, metaphysics defines consciousness as simple perception. A stone has consciousnesses as it can react to sound waves passing thru it. We have audial, visual and other consciousnesses - our abilities to perceive reality. We can perceive thoughts in limited capacity - that's the mental consciousness. Intelligence is a much more complex phenonenon - it's ability to establish relationships between things, the simplest of those being "me vs not me". Intelligence without consciousness is essentially intelligence without ability to perceive the outside. Connect AI to the network and that very second it gains consciousness.
I do appreciate the consistency of that perspective, it is interesting. I must respectfully disagree with those definitions.
I think that consciousness ought to imply some element of choice. A rock cannot choose to get out of the way, nor in any way deliberately respond to sound waves. It is inert.
To me, the ability to establish relationships between things is a consequence ipso facto of the ethical framework required by the physical form. In other words, what we see is limited by evolutionary, genetic, and knowledge constraints. I'm defining intelligence as (g) factor in psychometrics [0] or roughly the upper-bound capacity of an entity to apply it's ethical framework consistently, and/or with any degree of accuracy, and/or across multiple potentially disparate domains of knowledge.
