If it's ever fair to say there's evidence of anything it's fair to say there's evidence for the mechanical workings of personal experience, in that case then. Why mechanical? Well: You say it's unexplained by the mechanical worldview. But it's got no non mechanical explanation and nor has anything else...and I don't see why it should be an exception!
If there's evidence for the workings, the experience of the self...how is it rational to believe there is anything more to that and that the self has any non mechanical aspects? What on earth would they be? What would it even look like?
If I'm all that exists it's more simple to believe I'm mechanical than I'm not. I have self-evidence to myself for my mind merely "thinking stuff" - for the mechanics of it - even if it's just the experience...but not anything more than that. Because of course: Belief that 'I' am "more than mechanical", is not any evidence that I am! So it's more logical to first assume I'm mechanical until otherwise demonstrated! Right?
Because it's the alternative to non-mechanical and if I merely believe that what I'm "thinking" isn't mechanical - that doesn't demonstrate anything further than the fact that I'm simply thinking it...in other words: It demonstrates nothing further than the mechanics of it! I'm only thinking that I'm more than mechanical, in that case. Merely thinking it. That's mechanics. Where's the evidence that it would be anything further?
EvF
If there's evidence for the workings, the experience of the self...how is it rational to believe there is anything more to that and that the self has any non mechanical aspects? What on earth would they be? What would it even look like?
If I'm all that exists it's more simple to believe I'm mechanical than I'm not. I have self-evidence to myself for my mind merely "thinking stuff" - for the mechanics of it - even if it's just the experience...but not anything more than that. Because of course: Belief that 'I' am "more than mechanical", is not any evidence that I am! So it's more logical to first assume I'm mechanical until otherwise demonstrated! Right?
Because it's the alternative to non-mechanical and if I merely believe that what I'm "thinking" isn't mechanical - that doesn't demonstrate anything further than the fact that I'm simply thinking it...in other words: It demonstrates nothing further than the mechanics of it! I'm only thinking that I'm more than mechanical, in that case. Merely thinking it. That's mechanics. Where's the evidence that it would be anything further?
EvF
