The most important reason anyone is an atheist

[Neo-Scholastic]

Esq, the findings of neuroscience must be interpretated. The framework for that is a philosophical question.

I'm not sure I'm understanding you. Care to expound a bit?

Just a bit. Quantifiable and third-party observable changes in the brain have a causal relationship with qualitative first-person experiences. We all agree on that. The character of that causal relationship remains an open question. You assume that the brain states generate mental properties. That may not be the case. Brain states could instead facilitate mental properties. For example, when you turn on a radio and hear music, the radio does not create the music. When you change stations, you have changed the state of the radio so as to receive something external to itself. Music is not an emergent property of radios.

---

Eegs and MRI demonstrate that aptly. People I have died hook into both so we could observe the process well. We also can measure what is going on in a persons brain using both and through the Montreal procedure we have mapped most of the limbic system and proven that electric stimulation is what produces thoughts and sensations.

See my reply above. You have already assumed that the electrical stimulation produces thoughts and sensations. Causal relation, yes. But that's not the whole story.

---

Neuroscience is to Neurosurgery as Engineering Science is to Mechanics.

Philosophy of Mind is to neuroscience and mathematics is to physics.