>I mean, it's less exciting when you break that down into the what it means for a person to be aware of themselves. For me, it breaks down to neurons & symbols, well-known scientific domains.
I'm not aware of "neurons and symbols". I'm aware of feeling, sight, smell, etc.. The fact that consciousness is an experience is what's fundamentally at odds with building a consistent model. Modeling cognition is the easy part.
a), you can have that thought only because of symbols, and b), people without thought can feel, see, smell, etc. I don't see how your argument holds any weight.
