Sure, you can study it, but we are nowhere near being able to objectively measure it well enough to make objective predictions that fit a given individual, as o

Sure, you can study it, but we are nowhere near being able to objectively measure it well enough to make objective predictions that fit a given individual, as opposed to some hypothetical average person. A lot of the things that indeed are possible (like brain imaging for pain response) are only feasible in a lab setting, they're not in widespread clinical use. Maybe they should be, maybe doctors shouldn't be handing out fentanyl like candy and instead look at what's going on in their patient's brain first - but then how do you prove that what's showing on the screen reflects the experience of the patient? That's not to say that such studies are entirely useless. They're one more data point, but ultimately, the decision should be up to the individual. This is also closer to my experience of how patients are actually treated. There is no oracle system that can tell you what the right way to treat an individual is. > I think the core of our disagreement here is that you seem to think that experience is somehow supernatural Not at all. I don't think we disagree on what's possible "in theory". I'm not a dualist.