[ExI] Subjective/Objective

[Mike Dougherty]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2026, 1:48 PM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> Can an external party, even in principle, know for sure what someone else
> is experiencing?
>
> This is, I think, an important question that determines whether
> 'subjective' phenomena can be regarded as separate from 'objective'
> phenomena. Something that is objective is something that we can all verify
> and hopefully agree on, that we all have access to. Examples include the
> moon, the law of gravitation, 1+1=2, dead people don't talk, etc.
>
> Subjective things are those that only one person, the person who
> experiences the subjective phenomenon, has access to. Examples include what
> it is like to be a bat, the experience of a specific shade of maroon, the
> sadness I feel when thinking of my dead cat (I really miss him, but don't
> expect anyone else to feel the same way).
>
> [snip]
>
> What I'm saying is that there is absolutely NO WAY that one person can,
> without any uncertainty, know what another person is experiencing or has
> experienced in the past. We are all sealed vessels, with our own unique
> contents that is only accessible to ourselves. I don't expect that to ever
> change, even with the advent of uploading (what comes after uploading,
> though, is an open question, and may destroy my argument. Time will tell).
>
> If anyone can think of a refutation to this view, please post it here. I'd
> be most interested in reading it (but please, PLEASE, use plain language!
> No Brentian 'knowledge of', 'fundamental/causal qualities' or 'wrong
> physics', please!).
>

I think the definitions are too assumptive.

I suppose you are asserting something about the precision and fidelity of
knowing subjective experience.   I bet you'd agree that hitting your thumb
with a hammer subjectively "sucks" - but I'm not sure the various
permutations of nuance need to be deeply modelled down to neuronal
correlates of consciousness to precisely grasp the fundamental of whatever
swear words you use to name the sensation,  nor do we need measure the
wavelength of light to know what color is the inevitable bruise.

We "think" we "know" what a hydrogen atom is, or is like, or what it does -
but who really knows?  If the math works, there might well be unicorns and
leprechauns dancing around the nucleus.

Refutation? No, i think i agree with you.  I don't think that needs to be
as much an issue for each of us to share a world of common things that we
each enjoy in myriad ways - whether redness of red, qualia of quale, or
pheasant of fez.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260707/ee34d064/attachment.htm>