Yes, I was talking about cases (1) and (3) the whole time.
This is getting off-topic but it is an interesting argument. I agree that “I think therefore I am” is a really problematic argument. However, when you say “consciousness itself may be an illusion” I’m not sure what you mean, or even what you could mean. The only understanding I have of the concept of “illusion” is mediated through my conscious experience. In general, the only access I have to anything in the universe is through my subjective experience. Thus, if I concede that my subjective experience is merely an illusion then I simultaneously admit my basis for knowing anything at all about anything whatsoever is predicated on an illusion. If I cannot trust that I experience things (whether or not I believe that those experiences are “true” in any sense) then I certainly cannot trust the inferences made from that experience such as there is such a thing as the universe. If I discount my experience of illusions as merely an illusion then I no longer have a concept of illusion to apply to my conscious subjective experiences.
In other words, I think the position that consciousness is an illusion is self-defeating. If consciousness is an illusion then we have no basis for believing anything at all. It’s no so different from Boltzmann brains or Last Thursdayism.
Sorry, no. In this case you were literally putting words in my mouth. I explicitly claimed that some people have to perform the experiments, not that all people do. You argued against the latter instead of the former. You argued against an argument similar to mine but weaker. That is the definition of a straw man argument.
But the experiments must be performed in a laboratory before the results are discussed in journals so my contention is actually true. (I said first-hand must be prior, not that second-hand experience has no effect. This is another example of you claiming I made an argument I did not. I’ll refrain from using the dreaded “s-word” this time.)
Again, it is a valid point because the first-hand experience must come before the second-hand experience. The second-hand experience depends on the first-hand experience. Otherwise there would be nothing to report second-hand.
