Is a neuroscientist more qualified than a physicist on this particular topic?
Personally I'd leave it to the philosophy guys since we're that far from any understanding of it.
Personally I'd leave it to the philosophy guys since we're that far from any understanding of it.
But it feels more sparkly and special to treat it as a mystery.
But as soon as we solve some fraction of the problem with scientific means, a small fragment remains to be probed further, still mysterious. Solve that and a yet smaller facet still remains, as in Zeno's paradox. That has been the case with AI, with simulations and physics models and medicine and most fields of study.
Our notion of the authentic is always on fragile ground, and this is most easily seen in music, where technology has enabled total control of the sound on a theoretical level of adding harmonics, but not in the practical sense of "reproduce this sound but make it Better". At the extreme ends it becomes a matter of taste again - why else should vinyl or vacuum tubes or analog filters remain so cherished? As we gain more technology, more of our lives enters this limbo where science can provide deductions that identify and change the measurable, but do not tell us how to pick good measures for ourselves. Philosophizing it is just a matter of continuing to ask those kinds of hard questions and inching forward ever so slightly each time.
...Which would be a subjective experience that seems to have curiously objective elements to it, because colours have been shown to correlate with specific sensations and associations across populations.
And then there's the much deeper question of the extent to which quantum phenomena need an objective observer.
If you think that question is trivial, try to design an experiment which provides objective evidence of change without ultimately relying on the subjective experience of a human experimenter.
Your subjectivity is your brain is you. But only tiny scraps of it are consciously accessible. Nearly all of it just does, it doesn't reflect on the doing. You only notice your visual processing when you force it to glitch or strain with optical illusions and the like.