[ExI] Zombie glutamate

Sat Feb 14 19:22:06 UTC 2015

Hello Folks,

Tomaz, William, and many others, it seems to me from what they say, 
still don't understand what a redness quale is or is not.  Nor do they 
understand what zombie glutamate is or is not.  Maybe they have red the 
paper:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vxfbgfm8XIqkmC5Vus7wBb982JMOA8XMrTZQ4smkiyI/edit

But if they have, I see no evidence that they understand what it is about.

Stathis, it seems to me, at least understands what a redness quale is, 
and us not.  But he is still missing the most important part of what I 
am trying to say, as proven when he states:

 > Brent believes that consciousness is not due to the system 
structure but rather to the substrate.

this is absolutely wrong.  I fully accept that it is possible that the 
system structure may be responsible for an elemental redness quale we 
can experience.  What I am describing is, how can you prove to everyone, 
qualitatively, experimentally, whether it is system structure, some kind 
of a particular material, like glutamate, some kind of quantum 
weirdness, or maybe some kind of recursively complex system that enables 
a 'redness quality to arise'.  I am open to any of these as being 
possible theories that science is about to prove correct using the 
qualitative methods I am describing.  What I am describing is how do you 
theoretically bride the qualitative information gap, so you can prove 
who has it right, and who has it wrong.  All I am saying is that 
whatever is responsible for us experiencing a redness qaule, is 
detectable, by doing the same technique that our brain does, when we are 
able to detect that we have redness knowledge vs greenness knowledge.  
All I am doing is describing the qualitative theory that will enable 
that, by getting around the quale interpretation problem.

The only reason I don't use a system theory, in the idealized 3 color 
world example, as required to bridge the qualitative information gap 
with a falsifiable theory, is because nobody has described any possible 
falsifiable way, which a system could cause a redness quale to arise.  
Once you provide that, I will be happy to use that in the falsifiable 
idealized effing theory example to better communicate to you how your 
belief that there is a 'hard' problem is completely wrong.

Bill W asked:

"I am not saying that it is a waste of time, I just want to know what 
you intend to do with the answers?"

Right now, the prediction is that all of theoretical physical science is 
nothing but qualitatively blind zombie science. Theoretical physical 
scientists are spending billion of $$$ on things like the large hadron 
collier, and getting almost nothing. Yet they are completely missing the 
qualitative nature of physics, just like the brilliant scientist Mary 
that hasn't stepped out of the black and white zombie room yet, and 
experienced, for herself, what real glutamate is like and how it is 
different from zombie glutamate.

In my opinion, the greatest discovery in physics, ever, will be the 
discovery of its qualitative natures.  It will include the realization 
that all of our science, to date, is just zombie science.  You don't 
need to spend billions of dollars to achieve that greatest discovery in 
physicists ever.  You just need to answer the question you are asking, 
so people will realize the significance and importance of knowing that a 
sunset, likely has a qualitative nature about it.  And your knowledge of 
the sunset, as phenomenally glorious as it is, has nothing to do with that.

More than any other discovery in physics, discovering nature's 
qualitative properties. so we can do more than zombie science, so we can 
do qualitative science of redness, will we  be able to finally answer 
the questions: What are we, what are spirits, what is consciousness, and 
most importantly, what is it all qualitatively like.

And if you can't see why that is important, then, oh well, I have no 
hope for you, and you ability to understand what uploaded Godly 
consciousness could be qualitatively like, or basically what heaven will 
be like, in the near future.  Uploads are going to be a lot more than 
zombie uploads.

Brent Allsop

On 2/14/2015 9:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote:
> Here is my question:  even if you could identify the exact electrical 
> and chemical goings-on in the brain when a person experiences some 
> sensation, what exactly will you know?  How will it help you know 
> something else?  We know, for ex., that the amygdala is involved in 
> emotions, particularly anger.  How does that help us understand anger 
> and how to deal with it?  I am not saying that it is a waste of time, 
> I just want to know what you intend to do with the answers?
>
> bill w
>
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Stathis Papaioannou 
> <stathisp at gmail.com <mailto:stathisp at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On Sunday, February 15, 2015, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com
>     <mailto:johnkclark at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         On Sat, Feb 14, 2015  Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com>
>         wrote:
>
>             > Brent believes that consciousness is not due to the
>             system structure but rather to the substrate.
>
>
>         If computers with the same logical structure but with
>         different substrates (say vacuums tubes,  Germanium
>         transistors and Silicon transistors) all came up with
>         different answers when you multiplied 27 by 54 I'd have a lot
>         more confidence that this theory is correct, but they don't,
>         they all come up with 1458.  Actually calling this a theory is
>         giving it too much credit as there is no experiment that can
>         be performed to prove it wrong, or even a experiment that
>         would allow you to learn a little more about it.
>
>
>     There are experiments that can be performed - try a physically
>     different, but chemically identical substrate using alternative
>     isotopes. It would work just the same, proving that working just
>     the same is what is important, and not what the parts are made of.
>
>
>     -- 
>     Stathis Papaioannou
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     extropy-chat mailing list
>     extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>     http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20150214/79ba7be6/attachment.html>