fundamental experience of human life remains a mystery. Which […] does support the reasonableness of doubting science’s confident pronouncements regarding other mysteries science claims to have set aside
Jack, wrong conclusion about science, I think you know better than that. Not sure where this playful antagonism comes from but in the wrong hands it leads to celebration of not knowing (i.e. ignorance) which is fertile ground for organized religion.
You do need to spend more time with scientists (I am a trained engineer but not a practicing applied scientist) — they really are gentle creatures who doubt self and theory for a living. They make hypotheses, not pronouncements. That said, they will get defensive and preachy (sarcasm intended) when some use the existence of some yet unexplained mysteries to cast doubt on other well supported scientific models, like for example evolution.
The application of Occam’s razor in creationism vs. evolution comes down firmly on the side of the latter. And it is not much use in resolving the consciousness debate.