Thanks for responding. I like when people engage in discussion.

Firstly, it is not because opinions are minority than they are wrong. Actually intelligence is minority in this world :) So, I'm not afraid not to belong to the herd.

I'm not against the Free Energy Principle, either. It's a broad biological principle, kind of obvious, and it goes against the ancient view that our brains were just heaters.

Predictive Processing is also obvious for me, and like the former it doesn't go against EM. Stanislas Dehaene was the first, more than ten years ago, to prove that the CNS is a Bayesian probabilistic machine. However it has nothing to do with psychology--or bring me some more arguments for it. Again, as an EM I think psychology is an obstacle to make good neuroscience. I'm more in favor of Pattern Processing and the need for more Computational Neuroscience.

About materialism, if you read well my article, I state that materialism , like many other EM, is what is provable by scientific experiment, i.e. energy, electromagnetism, etc. Physicalism is only quibbliing. Nobody on Earth would be a Materialist and not a Physicalist!

Penultimately, I'm torn about qualia. Sure, there are correlations with brain activity, and I like what Damasio says about it, but and still, as an EM, and I think consciousness--like other ancient psychoreligious concepts like free will--are poisoning our comprehending of human mind.

And ffinaly, in order to make real science we should dump all that catch-all buzzwords--that's why I'm in favor of Eliminativism--and let AI decipher our CNS in term of patterns of thinking.

Looking forward to reading you