If the inattentional blindness paradigm yields no difference in behavior, report, or downstream cognition, the 'phenomenal but unusable' hypothesis explains nothing that absence of experience does not equally explain.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Absence of experience(as used in debates about consciousness and perception): The state of not experiencing something at all—like not seeing something because you never looked at it in the first place.
Downstream cognition(as used in philosophy of mind and cognitive science): The thinking and mental processes that happen as a result of or come after an initial experience—basically, what your mind does with information after you first encounter it.
Inattentional blindness paradigm(as used in cognitive psychology and philosophy of mind): A scientific experiment where researchers show that people often fail to notice obvious things (like a person in a gorilla suit walking across a video) when they're focused on something else.
Phenomenal but unusable(as used in debates about consciousness): The idea that you might experience something consciously (like seeing a color) but be unable to actually use that experience to do anything, like describe it or react to it.

Based on where you are in your exploration