>
>
> This claim is patently false, since brain chemistry and neural activity,
> which fluctuate, are not (wholly) dependent on external stimuli.
>
>
>
That can be considered an instance of homeostasis, pure biology. Certainly
not evidence of consciousness.
Of course, if Harrison's argument is to be consistent we have to recognise that there is no "internal" and "external" in the case of animals. They're merely little machines. Little machines that mimic their surrounding enviroment both physically (in the case of mimicry) and behaviorally (in the case of mimesis). In this conception, which, as I said, is perfectly feasible, even the most "advanced" animals are no different from extremely basic robots which learn not to bump into a wall twice...