>>12356519Stupid as fuck. No serious scientists that work in these fields believes this crap.
Pentode is a genius, but fuck this is stupid as hell
OP you have to clarify what you mean by the question. Would a unified functionalist-y theory that is able to predict behavior, give semantic descriptions of your internal states based on brain states, etc. be explaining consciousness? Would a theory that somehow gives necessary and sufficient conditions for consciousness be sufficient? What about IIT and global workspace theory? Do these count as explanations (if they hold)?
If you mean something like “why it feels like it does” or other qualia type shit, then what could a scientific explanation of that possibly look like? IMO it would be a chain of metaphors at best
