why do we enjoy poetry From the perspective of neuroscience?

[Alan V]

We may not know all the details, but they are likely technical anyway.  Nothing about this is difficult in principle as far as I can see.

It's not difficult if we are satisfied to say "It just happens." But the experience of smell or color presents itself to me in non-abstract ways. Qualia are among the few things we have concrete experience of. Far from being just technical details, the ontological jump from electrochemical events to felt experience is completely unexplained.

Let's just assume, for a moment, that we have complete knowledge of how electrochemical events are translated into felt experiences. My contention is that such knowledge would be entirely technical and not explanatory in the sense you and others are looking for. This is because I think the real hard problem of qualia does not lie at the translation, but at the evolutionary creation of subjective selves. This would seem to be upheld by the fact that elementary consciousness ceases with the interruption of the functioning of the midbrain. The higher, more evolved centers of the brain are add-ons or supplements to that basic consciousness. They add more abilities, including more refined translations of information which is already felt to whatever extent.

So what I have been trying to convey all along is that the hard problem of consciousness is hard in part because it is misframed. I have been trying to reframe it, as I think the book The Consciousness Instinct does a good job of doing. In my estimation, the problem of qualia is really the evolutionary problem of how selves emerged. That makes the problem both more complex and easier to tackle, because it can now be broken down into smaller pieces which can be addressed separately. The book takes a premilinary stab at this reframed problem.

So this is the reason I think scientists have already solved the qualia problem as it is presently framed by many philosophers. You will say this just transfers the problem elsewhere, and I agree that it does. But it also significantly changes the nature of the problem.