> The presence or absence of consciousness could be empirically verified and experimentally tested.
No, it can't; there are various behavioral traits that are conjectured to be indicative of consciousness that can be tested, but consciousness itself can either be tested nor observed in anyone except the observer.
> Notice, that consciousness is not an abstract idea, it belong to the category of biological processes.
No, consciousness is not a biological process, it's a phenomenon which is assumed to occur as a product of biological processes, though it's often conjectured that it could also occur as a product of other processes as well.
Yes, consciousness is a product of various behavioral traits, but its presence could be empirically tested. There are simple quick medical procedures which could tell whether a man (or even a dog) is conscious or not, and there is an ultimate test in a fMRI scanner which could prove that the patient has no consciousness. Any religious nonsense about validity of the fMRI test is plain stupidity.
Some limited artificial consciousness is obviously possible, even artificial self-consciousness, at least in theory. But possibility does not imply existence.
No, it can't; there are various behavioral traits that are conjectured to be indicative of consciousness that can be tested, but consciousness itself can either be tested nor observed in anyone except the observer.
> Notice, that consciousness is not an abstract idea, it belong to the category of biological processes.
No, consciousness is not a biological process, it's a phenomenon which is assumed to occur as a product of biological processes, though it's often conjectured that it could also occur as a product of other processes as well.