dat Buddha-field:
>> How would a science of consciousness differ from the science of consciousness we have now?
A science of mind would be more open to working with phenomenology and would be open minded. For example, having OOBE travelers and NDE havers try to verify some sort of verifiable information. Those kind of experiments combined with fMRI (when possible) would be a very basic start.
>>That's the kicker. I think that is where many people get led astray. So I think it makes more sense to think about episteomlogical dualism instead of ontological dualism when talking about consciousness (I think i get this from Flannagan). And so, I would say, that your intuition that they are different "things" is the problem that you need to overcome (and to even to talk about consciousness being a "thing"), in that your intuitions aren't a reliable guide to understanding the problem of consciousness.
>>that most people in general, like yourself, are dualists, and I think that is true of the majority of people here.
First off, I'm definitely not a dualist. If I had to categorize myself I would say idealism is more appealing. Honestly though, and no offense, this is not a debate I want to have. I've had this debate many times in the past and know exactly how it goes.
What my practice has shown me is that reality doesn't fit nicely into small conceptual boxes drawn by philosophers past. Reality is far stranger than either you or I can conceive, and I happen to think that reality is pretty damn weird! I encourage you to stay open minded about how much consciousness is capable of, and see where your practice takes you.
Ok, no debate. All I would say that I equate open mindedness with being willing to believe things for which there is little grounds for believing, due to little evidence or theoretical incoherence. So in the case of science, being open minded is generally a bad thing and not to be encouraged. Following that lead, for my personal practice, I am pretty closed minded, but I wouldn't necessarily encourage you to be the same - if you want to be open minded, then go for it!
edit: just to add, regarding dualism, is that talking about mind vs. matter, and that consciousness and physical events seem like ontological different things is to my mind classic dualism - but what I like about Buddhist philosophy of mind, is that Buddha figured out that talking about the mind or consciousness as a "thing" was probably a mistake, and that it makes more sense to see mind as "process".
double edit:
And yes, reality is indeed far stranger than I can imagine! Who needs astral projection, when you can just look in the ocean...

