what would awareness look like?

​Question:  Throughout The Grand Delusion I think your “case” about the utility of science / belief within a limited sphere (Chapter 34) is fairly clear.  At the same time, (Appendix B) you point out myriad problems (e.g. unwarranted assumptions like those contained in the hard problem) with the current status quo in branches of neuroscience and the philosophy of mind.  Collectively, your “case” seems to at least approach a generalized skepticism about their inherent projects (i.e. given so much of their entire endeavor is predicated on “flat earth” perspectives, we may do more to perpetuate confusion rather than clarify).  

Do you have any thought on what salvaging the metaphoric “baby” from the bathwater would look like for these branches of science / research?  To put it another way, in Appendix B, Part 1, you say, “A radically different understanding of what is actually going on is needed.”  Concretely applied, do you have thoughts on what that could / would that look like?
 
Response to Q1:  Salvaging what baby?  To continue with your metaphor, all such “babies” (I assume you mean “hypotheses”) are necessarily made of clays (concepts) which inevitably dissolve in the bathwater of silent, astute observation.
 
Response to Q2:  Rather than formulating yet another hypothesis, what’s required is a response much like what I’ve laid out in this book.  That is, one that encourages us to abandon searches for solutions solely within the conceptual but instead directs us to rely on perceptual experience alone—i.e., on pure Awareness, with no thought or mental construction (i.e., concepts) whatsoever.