[extropy-chat] Qualia Bet

[gts]

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 10:44:48 -0500, Robin Hanson <rhanson at gmu.edu> wrote:

> Numbers, and most math objects, are patterns, i.e., abstractions. Things  
> that sit in our networks of causation have many things in common, and we  
> can describe those common features with patterns.  The patterns  
> themselves, as opposed to their instances, do not as far as we know  
> separately sit in our network of causation, though brain states that  
> describe and think about those patterns do.

You seem to be describing an Aristotelian rather than a Platonic  
understanding of mathematics. When you say "patterns" I hear "universals,"  
but this is not what Plato meant and probably not what Marc means.

In another message I asked Marc to explain, according to his theory, how  
it is that we seem to understand each other when we speak about numbers  
but can't be sure when we speak about qualia. For example I think I know  
exactly what you mean when you say, "I am thinking of the number 5" but  
I'm not sure I know what you mean when you say, "I am thinking of the  
color green." For all I really know you see green the way I see red.

Marc has not answered my question but I after thinking about his ideas and  
combining them with my own I think I can offer an answer.

In platonic terms, we understand each other when we speak about  
mathematics because we are accessing the same objective information. You  
see the same 5 that I see because there is only one 5 "out there". Five is  
not merely an abstract pattern common to groups things of which there are  
five (as Aristotle might say). Five exists in its own right, separate from  
and and prior to any instances of five-ness in the world (as Plato would  
say).

If qualia exist in a platonic sense then there may be only one true  
"green." The green quale may exist objectively, like the number 5, and be  
a real primary quality of green objects rather than a Lockean secondary  
quality. If so then we all see green the same way, at least in principle,  
because we are accessing the same information.

Are we in agreement here, Marc?

Perhaps we all live in same world after all. :)

-gts