Oh, I know it's there; it's the only thing I know. (Not "we" - it's private knowledge; but it's not hard to find - it's always there, for eveyone). To extend t

Oh, I know it's there; it's the only thing I know. (Not "we" - it's private knowledge; but it's not hard to find - it's always there, for eveyone). To extend the analogy: the painting isn't reliable - it's not even certain it's not a hallucination. But there has to be a substrate to paint on, even if the painting itself consists of layer upon layer of deception. I don't know if this is true; but it seems more plausible to me than that consciousness is an accidental consequence of the bizarre tumblings of matter. And anyway: the idea that consciousness is emergent, and matter is fundamental, doesn't offer any explanation of the subjectivity of experience and consciousness. You can't explain consciousness as "emergent" without saying first what it is that emerges. Of course, the appearance of consciousness arises from programs like Eliza, or LaMDAwhotsit. They were made to produce that impression.