Monist vs. Dualist Experiment?

[bennyboy]

@bennyboy The observation of the necessity of their being an "I" tells you nothing of its nature, as Genkaus pointed out.

Already covered:

The fundamental error of dualism - which is the same one you commit in the rest of the argument - is rooted in this proposition. That the 'simplest observation of one's own experience shows that there's an "I"' - it tells you nothing about that "I"'s metaphysical nature. You don't know whether that "I" is a fundamental entity or a composite one. You don't know what it is made of. You don't know anything about its nature other than that it observes.

That's all correct.

In fact, I'd go even farther: nothing you experience tells you about the ultimate nature underlying those experiences. That includes the true nature of both the subjective self and the objective "other" that you contemplate, and the ideas that occur to you. And yet somehow we've arrived at a skew: the experience of other is taken at face value "Of course there's a physical world. I can hit you in the face with it," but the experience of self is not: "Just because you experience the self as unique and different to other matter doesn't make it so."