There is also a large literature on understanding the brain in terms of chaos theory, cellular automata, evolution, .... , and all of those can shed light on some aspects.

This statement strikes me as false. Evolution says things about what the brain does, and what it ought to do, but nothing about how it does it. Chaos theory and cellular automata are completely unrelated pieces of math. Everything else is either at the abstraction level of neurons, or at the abstraction level of "people like cake"; PCT is the only model I am aware of which even attempts to bridge the gap in between.

life is short and if the poster wants to convince me, the burden of proof lies not on my side.

Reality does not care who has the burden of proof, and it does not always provide proof to either side.