Consciousness studies are getting markedly crazier, if we go by the traditional standards of science. No surprise that Darwinism is caught up in it. For example,
We have been assured for decades that a complete materialist understanding of life is just around the corner. Yet, as science writer Dan Falk notes, in an essay review of three new books on the subject, when you ask for details, “Get ready to dive down the rabbit hole.” …
Falk, a traditional science writer, found another recent offering even harder to take. In The Case Against Reality: How Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes (Penguin, August 2019), UCLA cognitive scientist Donald D. Hoffman argues, as the title suggests, that our perceptions have evolved to be wrong. One senses Falk’s frustration with that view:
“But surely our perceptions map in a mostly true way onto the real world, right? No, Hoffman says: He argues that Darwinian evolution would favor an organism with less-accurate perceptions over one that perceived the world as it really is. He calls this wildly counter-intuitive proposition, on which the rest of the book rests, the “fitness-beats-truth” (FBT) theorem; he says it can be proven through computer simulations.” – Dan Falk, “Three New Books on Human Consciousness to Blow Your Mind” at Undark “Consciousness: Three new books, same dilemma, still fascinating” at Mind Matters News
Well, if the mind is an illusion and the computer simulations were wildly wrong, how would Hoffman even know? But does it matter, as long as he keeps the Darwinian faith?
No wonder the scoffing grows—and increasingly, the thought police are always somewhere else.
See also: Why some scientists believe the universe is conscious The basic problem is that naturalism (materialism) is stuck. Really stuck.