[ExI] Fwd: Paper on "Detecting Qualia" presentation at 2015 MTA conference
Brent Allsop
brent.allsop at canonizer.com
Sun Feb 1 23:44:01 UTC 2015
Hi Stathis,
On 2/1/2015 5:52 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> Aspects of consciousness, or if you prefer of qualia, can certainly be
> investigated scientifically, and a large part of neuroscience and
> psychology is devoted to doing just this. However, it is impossible to
> investigate scientifically if someone actually has qualia and what
> those qualia are like.
>
When I say you believe this is not approachable via science, I am
talking about the latter, which you clearly state is not approachable
via science. In the latter you are making the falsifiable prediction
that you cannot eff the ineffable.
>
>
> If you claim to be able to detect qualia then what test do you propose
> to use to decide whether CMOS sensors have "an intrinsic qualitative
> nature" or not?
>
The prediction is that if CMOS's behavior is the same as some quality
(which we have likely never experienced before) that we will be able to
present it to our augmented binding system in a way that will enable us
to compare it's quality to all the other qualities we have. Before we
do this, we will be like Mary, and know everything about the behavior of
CMOS. But once we know what our zombine information description of CMOS
qualitatively represents, we will also know, qualitatively, what CMOS is
like.
>
> It's not problematic imagining that the qualia would vanish if the
> substitution were made with parts lacking the redness quality. What is
> problematic - and the entire point of the experiment - is that the
> qualia would vanish **without either the subject or the experimenters
> noticing that anything had changed**.
>
That explains our miss communication, then. What I was trying to say,
and what this says you missed, is that the testable theoretical
prediction is that you will not be able to get or experience redness
without presenting glutamate (or replace glutamate with whatever your
favorite theory predicts is responsible for elemental redness) to the
binding system of your mind. Only when you replace the entire binding
system, with a binding system that is interpreting zombie information
representing redness, as if it was real redness, will it behave the
same. So, it will be behaving the same, but the qualitative subjective
nature of it's behavior will have completely faded, and be absent. The
system only behaves the way it does, because it contains interpreting
hardware that is properly interpreting the zombie information as if it
was the real thing. This is a form of the vanishing qualia case David
Chalmers predicts is possible, right?
Brent Allsop
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list