The I

Could I have been Obama? An argument against materialism

In the linked post Victor Reppert argues against materialism by claiming that a materialist world view will not capture one crucial fact: that he is VR.

We can only talk about this in the first person. So I want to consider the fact that I am Gordon Knight. Who is GK? physically I am a living organism of a certain type, with a certain body with certain brain states etc. Victor contends that an objective description of these physical facts leaves out a crucial one: I am GK. I agree with him , but he does not go far enough.
Suppose we have a complete description of not only the physical, but also the psychological facts of me. So we know not only what my brain state is, but also that I am thinking of Descartes, or having a feeling of pain .. whatever. We need not assume that this psychological description is in any way reducible to the physical. We can have a dualistic third person description of the universe.

But even in this case, something extremely crucial is left out. GK is feeling pain. well, that sucks. But it is very different from: I am feeling pain. We could have a complete description of my psychological qualiites, of what I am feeling, what I am thinking etc..

And yet this description would still leave out something crucial

I can know all about GK's feeling of pain. I might feel sorry for him

However well I know what GK is feeling. that knowledge in itself will not allow me to judge "I am GK" or "I am feeling pain":

The I is transcendental.