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

I think they'll eventually get very close if they can use the subjective reports of people who are hooked up to machines.

And if they don't, I doubt they'll get anywhere, because everyone's brains produce different patterns.

I wonder... what if they tried scanning those individuals who have basically no brain? Can't think of the particulars at the moment.

Seemed relevant ->

The small portion of soul that is incarnate, being within the body, is what we can call mind, consciousness, ego, self, our sense of self, if you will.

And it is that small portion that is most dramatically affected by brain damage, because it is so closely intertwined with the brain, in whatever way that it is.

Damage or alter the brain, the "filter", and you damage or alter the mind's ability to function as it normally should, because whatever function the brain performs for the mind has been disrupted. Whether by brain damage or alteration by chemical influences, drugs or otherwise.

As I see it, the mind is nothing more than a set of actions, such as remembering, being aware, thinking, and deciding. 

What is doing these actions? Surely the brain is a key player. Are other physical entities involved? Perhaps. Are other non-physical entities involved? I think we can rule that out be definition. After all, if any entity affects something physical, then it seems to me, by definition, that entity would be physical. (see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/physical)

If there are other entities involved in the set of actions that we refer to as mind, I do not see that their contribution to any continuation of those activities after death would be significant. For, from all we can see, when the brain is damaged, it affects all those activities. One would think that death, which is the ultimate in brain damage, would be the ultimate in shutting down all mental activities.

As I see it, the mind is nothing more than a set of actions, such as remembering, being aware, thinking, and deciding. 

What is doing these actions? Surely the brain is a key player. Are other physical entities involved? Perhaps. Are other non-physical entities involved? I think we can rule that out be definition. After all, if any entity affects something physical, then it seems to me, by definition, that entity would be physical. (see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/physical)

If there are other entities involved in the set of actions that we refer to as mind, I do not see that their contribution to any continuation of those activities after death would be significant. For, from all we can see, when the brain is damaged, it affects all those activities. One would think that death, which is the ultimate in brain damage, would be the ultimate in shutting down all mental activities.

Everything physical is only known by the mental though?

It's not really clear what physical entities are, though I suppose one could define them as entities lacking any mental content...of course there is [also] the question of how one entity affects another...this all leads to a variety of issues that have been discussed for years on this forum....

Of course the world could be Mind (God's dream or something like that) and death could be the end of any one individual's mental activity...I don't think this is the case but I accept it could be so.

As I see it, the mind is nothing more than a set of actions, such as remembering, being aware, thinking, and deciding. 

What is doing these actions? Surely the brain is a key player. Are other physical entities involved? Perhaps. Are other non-physical entities involved? I think we can rule that out be definition. After all, if any entity affects something physical, then it seems to me, by definition, that entity would be physical. (see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/physical)

If there are other entities involved in the set of actions that we refer to as mind, I do not see that their contribution to any continuation of those activities after death would be significant. For, from all we can see, when the brain is damaged, it affects all those activities. One would think that death, which is the ultimate in brain damage, would be the ultimate in shutting down all mental activities.

How about some empirical evidence, of which there is a lot? That trumps such materialist theorizing. For instance, The Self Does Not Die: Verified Paranormal Phenomena from Near-Death Experiences, by Rivas, Dirven and Smit, https://www.amazon.com/Self-Does-Not-Die...0997560800 .

Presents the most confirmed cases of consciousness beyond death ever compiled (over 120). In these cases, the authors have gone back to the original sources, the people involved in each case, whenever possible, rather than relying on secondhand sources. In so doing, they have assembled a unique collection of empirical data.

By carefully studying and describing many convincing and corroborated cases, during cardiac arrest and other cases, the authors conclude that there are good reasons to assume that our consciousness does not always coincide with the functioning of our brain: Enhanced consciousness can sometimes be experienced separately from the body.

Everything physical is only known by the mental though?

Yes.

It's not really clear what physical entities are, though I suppose one could define them as entities lacking any mental content...

I disagree with your definition. My brain has mental content, and my brain is physical.

of course there is [also] the question of how one entity affects another...this all leads to a variety of issues that have been discussed for years on this forum....

The "entity" we are concerned about is the mind. That entity, which I see as being a set of mental activities, is affected by whatever it is that makes mental activity occur. As far as I know, the thing that does the thinking is the brain.

What do you think does those mental activities, such as recalling events? If it is not the brain that does the recalling, why does one's ability to recall diminish with certain brain conditions?

How about some empirical evidence, of which there is a lot? That trumps such materialist theorizing. For instance, The Self Does Not Die: Verified Paranormal Phenomena from Near-Death Experiences, by Rivas, Dirven and Smit, https://www.amazon.com/Self-Does-Not-Die...0997560800 .

If my soul survived my death, and experienced something like an NDE on the way out, would it (he?) be able to remember what it saw?

My grandmother experienced anterograde amnesia, finding it hard to remember anything that happened after her stroke. If such brain damage can destroy the ability of the soul to remember things it experiences, would not death, the ultimate in brain damage, cause the deceased person to lose all memory of his NDE, even if he had one?

If my soul survived my death, and experienced something like an NDE on the way out, would it (he?) be able to remember what it saw?

My grandmother experienced anterograde amnesia, finding it hard to remember anything that happened after her stroke. If such brain damage can destroy the ability of the soul to remember things it experiences, would not death, the ultimate in brain damage, cause the deceased person to lose all memory of his NDE, even if he had one?

@Merle - you are beating a dead horse. The debate about this argument has persisted, at the very least, since the dawn of the Enlightenment Age. As someone who tends to be quite skeptical, I find little reason to hold out hope for the possibility of an afterlife. However, it remains crucial to maintain an open mind towards phenomena that science may not yet be capable of reducing to simpler terms. Consciousness may be one such phenomena. It's impossible to conclusively dismiss the idea of an afterlife, and I personally hold on to a sense of hope for its existence.

Yes.
I disagree with your definition. My brain has mental content, and my brain is physical.
The "entity" we are concerned about is the mind. That entity, which I see as being a set of mental activities, is affected by whatever it is that makes mental activity occur. As far as I know, the thing that does the thinking is the brain.

What do you think does those mental activities, such as recalling events? If it is not the brain that does the recalling, why does one's ability to recall diminish with certain brain conditions?

Regarding recollection when faced with brain illness, I think Terminal Lucidity challenges your view. There's actually a SciAm article on this by a self-styled "radical rationalist":

One Last Goodbye: The Strange Case of Terminal Lucidity

More generally, as per the neuroscientist-philosopher Raymond Tallis memories cannot be held in a brain that is defined as being made of non-conscious matter.

Though Tallis [is] an atheist and like you believes death is the end. It might be so. I don't think it is but I accept there is good reason to believe that there is no afterlife. If this isn't a problem for you - like it isn't a problem for many of my friends - that's fine.

If it bothers you, I would suggest looking into the alternative which many, many threads on this forum do.

@Merle - you are beating a dead horse. The debate about this argument has persisted, at the very least, since the dawn of the Enlightenment Age. As someone who tends to be quite skeptical, I find little reason to hold out hope for the possibility of an afterlife. However, it remains crucial to maintain an open mind towards phenomena that science may not yet be capable of reducing to simpler terms. Consciousness may be one such phenomena. It's impossible to conclusively dismiss the idea of an afterlife, and I personally hold on to a sense of hope for its existence.

I do think we should separate the irreducibility of consciousness from the afterlife. It definitely makes an afterlife more plausible but in itself isn't sufficient.

That said, at least for me the impossibility of consciousness with all its key aspects - Subjectivity, Rationality, Intentionality - coming from the material or (IMO) being made up of bits of consciousness does make me more open to the varied witness accounts that suggest a life after death.

I'm also not sure changes from dementia are more troubling than the way eating/drinking/drugs affect our brain. I guess people feel it's more stark, but even changes of personality are something I experience in dreams. As I mentioned a few times I had a strange dream where I was bitter high school rivals with the actor who plays Harry Potter in a dream...