Hemispherectomy?

[I_am_not_mafia]

How can it be subjective experience if you can detect it objectively?

If it is generated by brain then it should be detectable.

If it is generated by the brain and detectable, what would we expect to see?

[onlinebiker]

I never heard of such an operation - but it fully explains the guy who works at the electronics desk at Walmart.

[Dmitry1983]

If it is generated by brain then it should be detectable.

If it is generated by the brain and detectable, what would we expect to see?

I have no idea, ask neurophenomenologists.

[I_am_not_mafia]

If it is generated by the brain and detectable, what would we expect to see?

I have no idea, ask neurophenomenologists.

If you have no idea of what we should expect to see, then why are you so confident that it hasn't been ever been observed in a scientific experiment?

[Angrboda]

Brain is simply a transceiver. Consciousness is external.

Got any, whachamacallit... evidence?

There is no scientific evidence of consciousness so my claim is just as correct as physicalists' claim that mind is created by brain.

You need scientific evidence of consciousness now, do ya? Hooboy. Consciousness was accepted as a given by your very statement. If you want to discuss the question of whether consciousness exists, that is a separate question.

It might take a bit to put into words, but I think we have reasonably good evidence for consciousness (as good as for anything else), and the most parsimonius explanation is that it is local to the animals which believe that they are it, possess it, and control it. If we accept that we are consciousness, a reasonable first step, imho, then we must ask for the evidence which supports the various explanations of consciousness. I will give some of the main lines of evidence for consciousness being a product of the brain below. What evidence do you have for consciousness being external to the body and the body/brain simply being a transceiver, given the acceptance of the existence of consciousness?

Some kind of material, computational substrate is a necessary condition for the existence of a mind (whether it is sufficient is a different, irrelevant issue). In humans, the brain is this substrate. We know this principle as a scientific fact, for five reasons. I quote here from The Case Against Immortality, by Keith Augustine.

(F1) The evolution of species demonstrates that development of the brain obtains a corresponding mental development.
“First, phylogenetic evidence refers to the evolutionary relationship between the complexity of the brain and a species’ cognitive traits (Beyerstein 45). Corliss Lamont sums up this evidence: “We find that the greater the size of the brain and its cerebral cortex in relation to the animal body and the greater their complexity, the higher and more versatile the form of life” (Lamont 63).”

(F2) The same principle is demonstrated by brain growth in individual organisms.
“Secondly, the developmental evidence for mind-brain dependence is that mental abilities emerge with the development of the brain; failure in brain development prevents mental development (Beyerstein 45).

(F3) Brain damage destroys mental capacities.
“Third, clinical evidence consists of cases of brain damage that result from accidents, toxins, diseases, and malnutrition that often result in irreversible losses of mental functioning (45). If the mind could exist independently of the brain, why couldn’t the mind compensate for lost faculties when brain cells die after brain damage? (46).”

(F4) Experiments and measurements on the brain (EEG, stimulation of various areas) indicate a correspondence between brain activity and mental activity.
“Fourth, the strongest empirical evidence for mind-brain dependence is derived from experiments in neuroscience. Mental states are correlated with brain states; electrical or chemical stimulation of the human brain invokes perceptions, memories, desires, and other mental states (45).”

(F5) The effects of drugs show correspondence between brain activity and mental activity.
“Finally, the experiential evidence for mind-brain dependence consists of the effects of several different types of drugs which predictably affect mental states (45).”

The Argument from Mind-Brain Dependence

[Dmitry1983]

There is no scientific evidence of consciousness so my claim is just as correct as physicalists' claim that mind is created by brain.

  I will give some of the main lines of evidence for consciousness being a product of the brain below. 

Behavior, brain activity and reports from patients are not evidence of subjective experience.

---

I have no idea, ask neurophenomenologists.

If you have no idea of what we should expect to see, then why are you so confident that it hasn't been ever been observed in a scientific experiment?

I had many debates on r/DebateReligion until I was banned there and nobody was able to provide good sources of subjective experience being detected.

[Nakara]

Dmitry, what is your idea of what consciousness is?

[FatAndFaithless]

..How are reports from the patient anything except subjective experience?

[I_am_not_mafia]

If you have no idea of what we should expect to see, then why are you so confident that it hasn't been ever been observed in a scientific experiment?

I had many debates on r/DebateReligion until I was banned there and nobody was able to provide good sources of subjective experience being detected.

Is there anything anybody could possibly say to you that you would accept as being directly observable evidence of subjective experience generated by the brain?

[Angrboda]

  I will give some of the main lines of evidence for consciousness being a product of the brain below. 

Behavior, brain activity and reports from patients are not evidence of subjective experience.

I didn't say that brain activity was evidence of subjective experience. Behavior and reports from patients are, however, as we have good reason based upon our own firsthand experience that behavior and self reports are strongly associated with consciousness. Since we have reason to associate them with consciousness based upon subjective experience, they are evidence which relates those things to the brain and the body and are evidence that consciousness is an effect of the brain and body. You don't get around the problem that easily. And you still haven't provided any evidence for your belief that the brain is merely a transceiver. I'm open to the hypothesis, but I think any unbiased assessment of the relative evidence for the two theories falls clearly on the side of brain as producer of consciousness.