I am well aware that other explanantions than the physicalist one are compatible with the facts; there are always an infinite number of explanantions to fit the facts. That's why we need occam's razor.
Unless you can provide a specific reason to reject the physicalist solution,
that comment rebounds on you: you are rejecting physicalism, despite
its simplicity, because it doesn't fit your
Again, I am arguing for a two-handed subjective+objective approach.
The ability of Beethoven to perform an aesthetic activity such as composition without literally having the actual experiences indicates, to my mind, that
the quale/concept distinction is a fuzzy one.
a difference between eating food and imagining you are eating food.
a difference between "realy" being in pain and "merely feeling" that you are in pain. That is one of the unique features of subjectivity.
No. As defined by Chalmers, it is the relationship between experience and
No, I am noting that all the evidence points towards the idea that
consc. being genrated by the brain. How
this happens is another matter entirely.