gibran2 said:
Science cannot explain consciousness using what is currently known about the brain any more than one can explain the functioning of a computer after having observed that the “on/off” switch causes a change of state.
True, but I don't think we can explain
anything in the universe much better than that. I'll elaborate.
In the absence of knowledge about radio waves, you would claim that if a change in the receiver causes a change in the behavior of the television (which it does) then this is “proof” that television content originates from within the television.
There is a great difference between finding the
origin of something and simply explaining something. If you search for the
true origin of anything in the material world, you'll eventually trace it back to the singularity known as the big bang, and, depending on your theological or spiritual stance, you could debate as to whether that was the true beginning, or whether it was God, or some other divine force. Or you could argue that the universe was created when someone somewhere took a huge rip of DMT, and first their brain cells were created, then their body, then their pipe and lighter and the rest of the room, then everything else rippled outward from that center, and after a long while, eventually all the energy of the universe coalesced at some point into the big bang singularity as an aftereffect (something I've actually thought about in the past, haha).
So, if you require knowing the
origin of something to accept it as having a valid explanation, then you're going to have a really tough time finding anything you can explain. However, if you simply want to know what
causes something, which is usually what we're asking for in an "explanation", then I don't think you have any greater problem explaining consciousness than you do explaining the fact that when I let go of something it falls to the ground. The on/off switch DOES, in this sense, explain the fact that a machine works, in a simple way, because it causes the machine to function. The difficulty of the explanation is just a matter of how complex an explanation you want. An explanation can always become even deeper, and eventually you'll hit a wall explaining anything, because you'll get into the most fundamental subatomic particles known to man, and after that you can't break things down any further.
What I think you're looking for in an explanation of consciousness, is a sort of an idealized explanation that doesn't and can't exist for anything in the world, it seems. And it's not very much use to even refer to this at all.