> You can't but that doesn't change the mechanism of arriving at beliefs.

I’m trying to question the coherence of the proposition itself, and not trying to refute an argument in favor of it.

> You yourself can also never physically check say Plato's skull either but I doubt that deters you from thinking he had a brain.

The Plato’s brain question (PB) confuses me, but here is my attempt at an analysis.

First, I think PB is tricky in the same way that all historical propositions are tricky. And I think this trickiness is different than the trickiness around the proposition “other people are conscious”.

Second, here is a scenario that I think is like PB. Consider the proposition, “The Great Wall of China exists.” I’ve never been to China, but say you go and tell me that you saw the wall. And in principle I could go see the wall for myself. But now what if the wall is destroyed before I go to see it? Was the proposition that, “The Great Wall of China exists”, coherent before the wall’s demise, but now incoherent?

But if you tell me, “I am having subjective experiences”, how can/could I ever in principle examine this for myself, as I could the Great Wall?