I think you've exposed the dis-analogy by making this argument. A magnet is the cause/source/reason for/generator of/<insert verb> of a magnetic field. If you

I think you've exposed the dis-analogy by making this argument. A magnet is the cause/source/reason for/generator of/<insert verb> of a magnetic field. If you put a test charge in a field you can detect a magnet. So you argue, no simulation of a magnet produces a magnetic field. I assume you mean that you can produce data which would characterize a field were the real world in the state that you simulated. Then you say a simulated mind doesn't produce consciousness because consciousness is internal not external. Simulating a mind and interacting with it is just behavior checks. This doesn't make sense then. With magnets you say, "there needs to be a physical field present." But with minds you say, "there needs to be undetectable internal experiences, just reporting and observing behavior isn't consciousness" This is a dis-analogy.