Not really. With gravity, we always basically agreed on what we were trying to explain: why things fall or attract each other. With consciousness, we don't have

Not really. With gravity, we always basically agreed on what we were trying to explain: why things fall or attract each other. With consciousness, we don't have anything much better than "why is it _like something_ to be conscious?" Even if we agree on such a definition, what do we do with it? And the more objective our definition ("why do organisms respond to their environment?") the further we get from the thing we seek to explain.