Is the hypothesis "self — awareness is a function of brain physiology" considered scientific and why?
Self-awareness, that is, the ability of a living individual to experience subjective experience, is considered by many to be one of the physiological functions of the brain, such as memory, recognition, body control, and others.At the same time, it is impossible to refute or confirm the very assumption that such a thing as self-consciousness exists at all. That is, on the one hand, it seems to be obvious to each individual from the inside, on the other hand, no one can "prove" the existence of this sensation to an external observer. Read more in the search engine "difficult problem of consciousness" and "philosophical zombie".It turns out like this. Things like memory, body control, rational thinking, and so on can be measured and correlated with brain function. And we cannot measure the presence of self-consciousness in any way, which means that we can neither confirm nor deny its dependence on certain physical phenomena. This means that we can't investigate it by scientific methods.At the same time, it is considered (or not? I may be wrong) with the almost universally accepted scientific hypothesis that it is the brain that somehow "generates" self-awareness, but we just don't yet understand how. While "in general terms" it seems to be clear, for example, many people believe that if we create a model of the brain in a computer, then self-consciousness will also be copied into the computer. But if the nature (and even the very existence) of self-awareness has no scientific basis yet, then what is the basis of this hypothesis?