[ExI] Mental Phenomena
msd001 at gmail.com
Fri Feb 14 01:43:49 UTC 2020
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020, 4:09 PM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> That is because, by definition, the robot has no qualia, and there is
> nothing it's knowledge is qualitatively like.
> Of course, you can assert that such might still have qualia, but what use
> is there in believing in things like Unicorns that cannot be objectively
> observed and proven to exist like can be easily done with REAL qualia?
By your arbitrary definition the robot has no qualia. This is the next
example so far why this whole snarl of language falls apart: your unicorn
qualia vs real qualia are arbitrary distinctions... none of this is real.
You use "quale" in the same way preachers use "soul" - to assert that
everyone is wrong because they don't see it your way. I only have as much
grasp of 'real qualia' as I agree with you and where we differ I am called
Have you considered that you cannot "eff the ineffable" because the actual
definition of the term?
This thread needs an infusion of new words to better establish goals and
find common ground. I suggest not using red, green, glutamate, glycine, or
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat