SIgh. UNfortunately sir, the deal requires an acceptable explanation. This thread may not be the place for this bit of banter, but your explanation "is as clear as mud but it covers de groun'". There are fundamental mechanistic assumptions built into your proposition and they are a self-proposgating loop. "The neurons that hold our conscious memories"..oh, really? How do they do that? "They take stuff they know from memory, add in stuff that never was - " But now you're talking about LH and Spaw. Are you saying these stalwart creative geniuses are...neurons? That all we know and love about these Puckish generators of high-value codswallop is just a bunch of wet switches flickering on and off? Are you saying, further, that not only the data in memories, vocabulary, and concepts but even the very act of perception, the instant of understanding, the flash of laughter--these are just reassemblages of microscopic bio-electronic blips? The absurdity of this qualitative contradiction escapes you, apparently.

No sir, your explanation does not explain, and no hat eat I shall for such.

A
A