Consciousness Trilemma

[bennyboy]

OFC I wouldn't, but since I'm not arguing that what relevance does it hold?  Here again we see language that invokes what cannot be.  Projector?  What is it projecting -to-?

Projectors project onto a screen. But don't strain the analogy. The point is that Casablanca is there to be experienced, even if the original sights and sounds weren't produced at the same time (they weren't, if there was any sound editing, for example).

 The humonculus rears it's ugly head again.   Eliminative materialists don't think that there is no discrete mental state, in time, of processing.  The are skeptical with regards to whatever it is we seem to  think the projector is projecting -to-, to take your terms.   

The brain is processing a variety of impulses, and those are brought together (lag or no lag) in a unified context. Even the "seeming," as you say, is itself a context-- seeming-together. I see a dog, touch a dog, hear a dog, and those sensations are bundled-- something, whatever it is, is aware of the relationship between those sensations.

 
This refinement (I actually don't see any) does not change the comments levied at it from eliminative materialism.  OFC eliminative materialists think that  something exists which is capable of what we call subjective agency.  They don't think that it -is- what it reports itself as, and they don't think that every instance of a reported subjective experience is a legitimate account.  Some, many or most..in their opinion, are the cognitive equivalents of a false memory.  The cognitive equivalent of an afterimage.  There's a picture of the humonculus, not a humonculus.

Where's the after-image?

- :looks up:........that's shakier than the last one, namely..in that -what it feels like for experiences to be experienced- is exactly what's in error.....?  It feels like I'm a little man in my head currently experiencing the present.....

If you feel like you're a little man in your head, that's your problem. Anyway, there's no "error" in awareness, and can't be, because it's not defined in relation to anything but the non-lacking of qualia. So long as anything at all is experienced, that fact is sufficient to establish awareness.

Eliminative materialists think that many explanations of consciousness have failed to find what must be present in order for them to be true, pursuant to that, holding to their definitions of consciousness is to fail before we have begun.

It's tarting to sound like you've found IIT with a cool new name.