Why assume when you can know? We know that man has the anility to input complex information into the computer/machine and that new creative i formatio is revealed by the machine not created by the machine. Computers don't create. Only humans do because they are created in the image of God.
There was a study on rat brains not too long ago that showed the difference between them and human brains has to do with a certain type of neuron that is able to resist temptation. Rats only pursue whatever they desire, but humans have (more) ability to interfere with their impulses, and logically our cerebral cognitive abilities have grown a lot to take advantage of this.
But even a rat has consciousness and some level of intention. You can extrapolate that by looking at a dog, for example, who can point at a leash when he wants to go out for a walk. So humans are not the only animals with consciousness and intention. That should lead you to extrapolate that consciousness and intention are phenomena that are rooted in something more general about the brain or even something about the fundamental structure/function of the brain due to its composition, i.e. ionized sodium and potassium solutions changing concentrations and variously flowing or being blocked from crossing channels.
Anyway, the bottom line is that when people look at supposedly inanimate systems and assume they are fundamentally different than a human brain or other animal brain, they forget that everything is fundamentally made of the same kind of stuff from the same periodic table. So subatomic behaviors such as ionization within a solution of electrolytes occur in all sorts of situations and phenomena, not just living brains.