C-Wars: The Unfolding Argument Strikes Back -- A Reply to 'Falsification & Consciousness'

The 'unfolding argument' was presented by Doerig et.al. [1] as an argument to show that causal structure theories (CST) like IIT are either falsified or outside the realm of science. In their recent paper [2],[3], the authors mathematically formalized the process of generating observable data from experiments and using that data to generate inferences and predictions onto an experience space. The resulting `substitution argument built on this formal framework was used to show that all existing theories of consciousness were 'pre-falsified' if the inference reports are valid. If this argument is indeed correct, it would have a profound effect on the field of consciousness as a whole indicating extremely fundamental problems that would require radical changes to how consciousness science is performed. However in this note the author identifies the shortcomings in the formulation of the substitution argument and explains why it's claims about functionalist theories are wrong.