Four Subsects Of Report Skepticism

Report skepticism is exactly as it sounds; can we trust the data we are receiving for the experiment? We can gather all the data in the world and analyze it for years but if you cannot trust the data itself none of the information we have gathered matters. Two distinct subsects of report skepticism exist and they are known as under-determination and circularity. Under-determination is when the data you have collected does not have any significant evidence between two possibilities. With external world skepticism, under-determination causes a major problem because no matter how much evidence or information we gather in determining whether or not the world is real or if we are just heads in vats, none of the evidence will decisively point in
When scientists tested people who had damage to their right inferior parietal lobe, the subjects were submitted to two houses that were exactly identical houses where one was on fire on the left hand side. The subjects all said they could not find any major difference between the houses but most said they would much rather live in the house that was not on fire. This leads us to believe that the subjects were not conscious of the left side of their vision due to their damaged right inferior parietal lobe, which leads us to believe that the right inferior parietal lobe is the neural correlates of consciousness, but we cannot fully trust this information. The reason we cannot trust this information is because of the possibility that the subjects were phenomenally conscious of the fire, but were not access conscious of the fire. This means the subjects were experiencing the information but were unable to access this information for the reports. The only way we could verify if the patients were phenomenally conscious or not would be to trust the patient and the results that have been gathered, which leads to the circularity portion of report