Thanks for the comment, Richard. It strikes me that one problem with applying the Aristotelian process of hypothesis, antithesis and thesis to modern discussions of consciousness is that in contemporary discussions, hypothesis is usually a take-it or leave-it kind.
For example, the argument that all we see and experience is a simulation, as in The Matrix: this is a completely serious modern philosophical assertion, but how can you argue it in an Aristotelian debate? The antithesis is "No, it ain't".
The problem is that the simulation thesis is not science, since it can't be falsified - as such it is part of a structure of beliefs,. The only other thing safe to say about beliefs is that they don't seem to be tractable using conventional philosophical approaches.
There’s a link here to mis/disinformation, which is characterised by evidence-free or evidence-weak statements.