Subjective Experience

[Robin]

Something is scientifically accessible if it is at least indirectly observable and you can objectively test a prediction about it.

So for example depression is something that occurs in subjective experience and we can design an experiment to test a hypothesis that a particular drug can alleviate feelings of depression.

Obviously our only way of objectively observing subjective experience is by behavioural measures but nearly everything science studies is observed indirectly.

There are reliability problems with using first person reports as a method of observation, but these can be overcome using proper experimental design and statistical methods.

So - yes - subjective experience is clearly accessible to science.

I wonder if the OP is really asking if science will explain subjective experience.

 

[Brent.Allsop]

Soapy,

Yes, that is the most relevant link containing the open expert survey on the best theories of consciousness.

From the main page there are other related topics on consciousness such as the one on the 'Hard Problem'.

If you select the 'Mind Experts' canonization algorithm on the side bar, most of the related topics on consciousness sort to the top. (i.e. you find what the 'Mind Experts' think are the best topics.)

Brent Allsop

 

[Brent.Allsop]

Effing the ineffable

Robin,

I'm not sure what you mean by this:

I wonder if the OP is really asking if science will explain subjective experience.

But the leading scientific consensus camp with the name "Consciousness is Representational and Real" describes what they call 'effing' the ineffable (as in: "Oh THAT is what salt tastes like for you!") And of course, this kind of objective / scientific reproducibility and ability to share such would make everything accessible, and finally literally pierce the 'veil of perception'.

And of course, if this was true as the theory described in this camps predicts it will be, achieving such an ability to eff the ineffable, and finally piercing the veil of perception would surely be the greatest and most life changing scientific discovery of all time right?

Sorry I haven't earned the right to post links yet. You can get to this camp by first going to canonizer.com. Then go to the topic on Theories of Mind and Consciousness, then look for the camp entitled: "Consciousness is Representational and Real".

As ever more experts contribute to this survey, this camp continues to extend the amount of scientific consensus it has compared to all other theories of Mind.

Brent Allsop

 

[Maia]

Quite honestly, this sounds like an odd question to me, because I'm measuring it against the entire concept of scales designed to measure mental illnesses and disorders such as depression, anxiety, the dissociative disorders, etc. Of course these are subjective, because they're self-adminstered scales. Their accuracy has been proven in a lot of different ways (do they have face validity, construct validity, split test validity, interobserver validity, what is their alpha, etc.) Basically, people who take the tests are rated against an agreed-upon lists of characteristics. This is where we got the Beck Depression Inventory, the Dissociative Experiences Scale, the Cambridge Depersonalization Scale, etc. If people score above a certain cutoff point, the gold standard for a DSM diagnosis is the structured clinical interview administered by a trained professional (depending on how much insurance or cash you have, this could be anyone from a social worker to a psychiatrist.) But this is even more subjective, really. It's the only way to adminster psychological testing.