> that which cannot be studied, because it is only capable of being experienced by one person and thus fails the criteria for reproducibility. This "argument f

> that which cannot be studied, because it is only capable of being experienced by one person and thus fails the criteria for reproducibility. This "argument from Popper" [1] is about as valid as saying that we cannot study snow because every snowflake is unique. There are reasonable grounds for believing that there is sufficient commonality between individuals' mental processes, and within individual's sequence of mental processes, for them to be scientifically studied. At the very least, there is absolutely no evidence at this point to refute this proposition. If our minds were really this distinct, we couldn't even talk to one another about them. [1] Not "Popper's argument", as I am pretty sure he would not have made it.