jats:pUnlimited associative learning (UAL) has recently been advanced as an epistemic marker for the evolutionary origin of consciousness. One feature of this approach is that it eschews theoretical commitments concerning the mechanisms responsible for consciousness. We argue that the plausibility of the UAL framework depends on making such theoretical commitments. Without such commitments, the UAL framework remains silent regarding important edge cases and fails to distinguish between clusters and clutters of properties sufficient for consciousness. We conclude that the UAL framework would benefit from returning to earlier theory-heavy approaches — i.e.those that make substantial commitments to the mechanisms responsible for consciousness.</jats:p>