[extropy-chat] Qualia Bet.

[Robin Hanson]

At 10:58 PM 11/30/2005, Marc Geddes wrote:
>Oh it is much worse than that.  If qualia are properties that do not sit in
>the network of causation for brain states, then qualia cannot be the reason
>that anyone claims that they have qualia!  The fact that qualia exist and
>that people argue for qualia existing could only be a coincidence.  People
>would say they had qualia even if qualia did not exist.
>
>You are also being too pessimistic when you say that if qualia are 
>something beyond ordinary material causality we can never know about 
>it.   Science is filled with examples of indirectly inferring the 
>existence of things (dark matter for instance or 11-d superstring 
>theory where we inferred extra spatial dimensions).   Non-material 
>aspects of qualia coud also be indirectly inferred.  (for instance 
>my multi-dimensional time theory - extra time dimensions could be 
>indirectly inferred if it were shown that such a hypothesis were an 
>effective explanation).

I didn't say anything about "material" causality, whatever that 
means; I only talked about causality.  We can only ever get any 
evidence about things that have causal connections to us, and that 
includes dark matter, extra dimensions, God, morality, and 
qualia.  If qualia properties of things cannot at least indirectly 
cause changes in us, they cannot be the cause of our beliefs about 
anything, including qualia.  And if qualia properties exist and can 
cause changes in us, then careful scientific investigation should 
eventually find clear evidence of them.

You *cannot* declare both "I know qualia exist because I see them", 
and also "scientific investigation cannot find qualia" or "qualia 
properties are non-causal."  Of course you can have beliefs regarding 
things of which you have no evidence.





Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Associate Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323