Wow, this is a very impressive and compelling camp. I’m sorry I haven’t noticed it before now. I’d love to learn more about you, and your work in this field. What is the history of PhysicalConscious Correspondism? You clearly know what you are talking about.
The entire “Relation to Other Approaches” section seems brilliant. The structure kind of ends up being ad hock, and not well organized, till someone like you helps us better organize things. I’m sure everyone would be happy with pushing towards implementing some of your suggested structural changes, especially regarding IIT.
Of RQT, you indicated: “however, we have not found an explicit emphasis on scientifically evaluating proposed correspondences.” Which tells me we are not stating what we need to say in the camp statement, because in my mind experimental falsifiability/demonstrability of any correspondence is what RQT is all about. So I’m hopping you can help us improve the statement, so that you agree that RQT does stress experimental demonstration of correspondence. It’d be great if we could figure out the best way to get RQT and Physical/Conscious Corespondism to dovetail or be integrated in a better way, as it seems to me they are almost identical theories.