[ExI] are qualia communicable? Was Why stop at glutamate?

[Brent Allsop]

My prediction is Jason is making things WAY too complicated, and talking
about everything BUT what is important.  And even all the stuff he is
talking about, will be possible, just a lot more complex to achieve that.
An elemental quality of everything Jason is describing is a standalone
pixel of a redness quality.
This single pixel could change to a grenness quality.  Sure, there is a lot
of different memories, and feelings, that one pixel would invoke
differently, in different people.  But all that other stuff doesn't matter,
only the elemental qualities does.
This pixel of elemental redness, and the resulting change from redness to
greenness, must identity match up with some objective description of the
same.
It is simply discovering what this identity is, and figuring out how
elemental redness can be computationally bound with all the other stuff
that would be different, in different brains.
My prediction is that we will discover which of all our descriptions of
stuff in the brain is a description of redness, We finally know which camp
is THE ONE, we finally know the true color properties of things, hard
problem solved, we can eff the ineffable, since our terms and properties of
our subjective experiences would then be objectively grounded.



On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 8:47 AM efc--- via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

>
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023, Jason Resch via extropy-chat wrote:
>
> > Even if Alice outputs her whole brain state, A(I), at best her friends
> only interpret it and reach states:
> >
> > B(A(I)), C(A(I)), D(A((I)), E(A(I))
> >
> > Do you see a way around this? Can Alice's output something that anyone
> upon seeing it will have the same experience as Alice has?
> >
>
> Not without a serious dose of science fiction and a weakening or
> redefinition of the term "same experience".
>
> If by same experience we want same time, location, hardware and
> software state, B would have to be "turned into" A, but B could not be
> both A and B, so if B is turned back from A to B, I cannot see
> how it could be done. It almost feels more like a logic problem
> than a philosophy problem. ;)
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20230414/36fffd87/attachment.htm>