Is the Filter Theory committing the ad hoc fallacy and is it unfalsifiable?

I don't think awareness requires an immaterial self doing the perceiving. Rather, as I have explained here, I think the molecules in my brain perceive things, and write the story of a conscious person doing it.


I disagree. I don't need a soul to do my remembering for me. I can do it on my own.

When I use the word "I," I am referring to that whole set of things that makes up my material body, plus any forces or other entities that may be involved in that which makes me be me.


Thoughts are actions that we do. Actions don't have weight.

Asking me to weigh my thoughts is like asking me to weigh a conversation or an exercise routine. You can't weigh a set of actions.

You still have not engaged with my challenge from post #100, "....you can't get away with this, with stealthily slipping in the consciousness of the perceiver as an unspoken assumption, without explaining how mind and subjective awareness arise from neurons when the parameters of these two entities are fundamentally different."

No explanation has been forthcoming. And it looks like you subscribe to some version of panpsychism, if you believe that the individual molecules of your brain's neurons have some form of conscious awareness. As has been noted before, panpsychism doesn't really explain consciousness, it just imbues it to every molecule of matter in some mysterious way.

Sure, human actions don't have weight. But thoughts invariably have "agentness" associated with them - a conscious agent had to generate those thoughts. It is the immaterial conscious agent behind these thoughts that you need to explain materialistically. In fact, you seem to be denying that you exist as a conscious agent; this is denying Descartes' famous "I think therefore I am".