But in that sense, qualia are perfectly justifiable as an evolutionary response to the advantages of considering something beyond the bare minimum required to respond to it.
Qualia cannot evolve, no more than carbon or electromagnetism can evolve. There is no selection process involved, nor any reproduction. Evolution requires both.
Yea, that may be my issues. To my understanding there is difference from the stimuli and reactions. In fact we have lots of practical test that is completely based off the concept I hit you, you do something.
Again, swing and miss. This isn't about the difference between stimuli and reactions. There are three things at work:
Stimulus - The physical action which causes the event. Things like getting hit with a bat.
Reaction - The physical action which results from the event. This includes all alterations to the physical structure of the body and brain.
Quale - The nonphysical sensation of the event occuring. This is all of the parts of conciousness that aren't found in the brain.
Under newtonian physics, everything has a cause and an effect, but not everything has a quale. A pool cue striking a pool ball, according to Newton, does not result in anyone or anything feeling any sensation of motion or touch. Neither the cue nor the ball is aware according to Newton. This is very much different from how people opperate, as we are aware. If you replace the pool cue with a living human's hand, suddenly there is someone feeling the ball move. And if you replace the living human with a deceased human, there is no sensation anymore.
Ultimately, we must either accept that the human body is no different than the pool cue and say that either both feel touch or neither feel touch, or we must posist some property that seperates one from the other. I choose the former, that the pool cue is capable of some degree of sensation, as I know that humans are capable of sensation and I also reject the idea that the atoms in a human are somehow different than the atoms in a peice of wood.
Just because a proposition is favorable doesn't mean that its true.
Honestly, the existance of qualia is not a favorable proposition. If they disn't exist, I could just say "Pure materialism is correct" and things would make sense. That's something I would really like, but as far as I can tell, pure materialism does not account for why there is a "me" who is feeling bits of light hitting a pair of retina and sensing select bits of information form inside of a brain.