I did try to acknowledge the question begging in my comment. My point is that both sides are begging the question. So neither side (false dichotomy acknowledge

I did try to acknowledge the question begging in my comment. My point is that both sides are begging the question. So neither side (false dichotomy acknowledged) can use question begging as an argument to dismiss the other. What's left? Who has more to explain? Surely at this point Descartes kicks in. The one undeniable piece of knowledge we have - the one that everything else is built on (precariously). Isn't the burden of proof on those that want to reduce consciousness to something else - when consciousness is all we can be certain of? I'm not dogmatic on this. I am pulled strongly in both directions and I had a youthful infatuation with Hofstadter/Dennett et al. On the other hand I know my desire to imbue the self with something transcendental is driven by romanticism. So here we sit.