[ExI] Coherent vs. Incoherent Fears of Being Uploaded

[Lee Corbin]

Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

>> I believe that this is how those who believe in qualia
>> use the terms. But to my surprise, you seem to believe
>> that it makes sense to talk of qualia. You do?
> 
> Qualia, consciousness, subjectivity, experience, intentionality,
> understanding: What a ridiculous question! Of course I believe in
> these things! So do you! So does everyone who is able to believe
> anything!

The "Q" word is especially dangerous. It's a reification
into a noun that causes many people to actually *look*
for a physiological manifestation. We're a lot better off
without it. Unlike those other, relatively unobjectionable
terms, this one arose strictly in the course of armchair
philosophy dabbling.

> But I also believe that they are related to the information
> processing that goes on in my brain in the same way that raising my
> arm is related to contraction of my deltoid muscle causing abduction
> of my humerus.

To be sure.

>> While I find it *conceivable* that there could be
>> zombies, I consider it ridiculous, for many reasons,
>> chief among them is that nature presumably could
>> have economized by turning out zombies instead of
>> us.
> 
> The philosophical argument turns on the meaning of the term
> "conceivable". Chalmers says that zombies are conceivable, but
> probably physically impossible.

Well, then, thanks for the warning about another word
I should avoid. And I can see from the subject line
of this thread that I too was picking nits.

Lee

> Searle says they are both conceivable
> and physically possible. Dennett says they are not even conceivable,
> that is, the idea leads to a logical contradiction. I tend to agree
> with Dennett.
> 
>