Are ALL arguments for a 'conscious' silicon chip based device fatally flawed?

Are all the arguments for a 'conscious' silicon chip based device fatally flawed..

If so, why do proponents keep persisting with an almost religious zeal?

There are usually up to seven differing forms of argument put forward by those hoping that one day a silicon chip based computer device will become conscious, they are:

1. Hardware implementation
2. Software implementation
3. Implementation by a System of interacting hardware and software components
4. Implementation via potential Emergent Properties arising within or upon a system.
5. Inference via output behaviour of components.
6. Inference from the apparent clear trajectory of evolving AI.
7. Inference from the assumed congruity of computations in the brain and computations in a potential digital device.

Each of these can be shown to be fatally flawed even to the point of absurdity.

The nature of the arguments from scepticism run roughly like these samples;

The Hardware Argument.

1. A conventional silicon chip (CPU or memory or graphics chip - it does not matter which) has no capacity to become conscious. That is it can never in any way 'wake up'.
   It is just an array of registers that accommodate a code of switch settings that are in no way physically interacting with other switches or switch patterns. Keeping switch patterns separate is in fact an essential feature of a well functioning micro-processor. So none of the microprocessing hardware of a digital computer has any capacity to become aware of anything at all regardless of what the transitory switch pattern of the code may be interpreted by a human as meaning.
   (In short a silicon processor can only, even in principle, ever become aware only of the code that is passing through it moment by moment - and that would never be any awareness of an external world or of a unified entity subjectively experiencing an ongoing reality).
   What is true of a single chip Is true of any system of connected chips.

The Software Argument.
2. So if the hardware can never become aware in any way can the software ever wake up: well of course a series of binary codes can never have any capacity to do anything other than relay that code to an address it has been commanded to attend. So no hope here either.
Moreover, it is not possible for any line of software code other than the one currently active from moment to moment to have any property whatsoever as it lies dormant awaiting activation.

Self-Consciousness (From SEP:Self-Consciousness):

"Human beings are conscious not only of the world around them but also of themselves: their activities, their bodies, and their mental lives. They are, that is, self-conscious (or, equivalently, self-aware). Self-consciousness can be understood as an awareness of oneself. But a self-conscious subject is not just aware of something that merely happens to be themselves, as one is if one sees an old photograph without realising that it is of oneself. Rather a self-conscious subject is aware of themselves as themselves; it is manifest to them that they themselves are the object of awareness. Self-consciousness is a form of consciousness that is paradigmatically expressed in English by the words “I”, “me”, and “my”, terms that each of us uses to refer to ourselves as such.

A central topic throughout the history of philosophy—and increasingly so since the seventeenth century—the phenomena surrounding self-consciousness prompt a variety of fundamental philosophical and scientific questions, including its relation to consciousness; its semantic and epistemic features; its realisation in both conceptual and non-conceptual representation; and its connection to our conception of an objective world populated with others like ourselves."
●

Types of AI:
There are four types of arti¦cial intelligence: reactive machines, limited memory, theory of mind and hypothecised self-aware
●●●●●●
We will discuss each of the above arguments to see if there is any hope - even in principle - for any one of these approaches.