02-10-2014, 07:43 PM
Whether or not an available theory of consciousness is sufficient to explain something has little to do with skepticism and everything to do with the state of actual, rather than make-believe, knowledge on the subject.
If we are relying on some tacit knowledge when interpreting evidence, that could be part of the problem of understanding due to possible confusion or ambiguity on what is important to consider (a well-defined domain) but again, skepticism from even materialism/reductionism has little to do with valid research interpretation.
It is up to the experimentor to bridge any knowledge gap which may exist in successfully interpreting their evidence.
If we are relying on some tacit knowledge when interpreting evidence, that could be part of the problem of understanding due to possible confusion or ambiguity on what is important to consider (a well-defined domain) but again, skepticism from even materialism/reductionism has little to do with valid research interpretation.
It is up to the experimentor to bridge any knowledge gap which may exist in successfully interpreting their evidence.