> There's no way we can be absolutely correct in emotional diagnosis, just the same as we cannot always be in the black when speculating on the stock market. Th

> There's no way we can be absolutely correct in emotional diagnosis, just the same as we cannot always be in the black when speculating on the stock market. There's too many factors at work and they'll never (rarely) align in the same pattern. In the real world, nothing ever aligns in the same pattern. That only happens in mathematical models. That doesn't mean we can't use language to describe those phenomena. In the real world, we also can never be never be "absolutely certain" of anything, beyond maybe something Cartesian. That doesn't mean we can't make judgments about our surroundings. > While unconsciousness is just the brain's autonomic functions, like encoding memory and recalling your multiplication tables. Why are you assuming that the difference between what's "automatic" and "not automatic" in the brain is well-understood, and fundamentally distinct from the concept of consciousness?