<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Hi John,<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/31/2015 2:03 PM, John Clark wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJPayv1Cx3yNRGGLb6erKWy2go0Vk_cFkwnyw1Km+Sd5-izkVw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 Brent Allsop <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:brent.allsop@canonizer.com" target="_blank">brent.allsop@canonizer.com</a>></span>
wrote:</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">> Oh Great! He
believes the idea of a redness quality is reasonable,
and now he is going to tell me what he believes redness
to be.</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>REDNESS is a qualia just like every sensation, it is a
label that gains it's subjective meaning only from it's
association with other things that have the same label.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
When you talk this way, you are not thinking about things rigorously
and distinctly. Sure, if your knowledge has a redness quality, you
can think of this redness quality as a lable, a label that all of
our knowledge of things that reflect 650 NM light has. You are
talking about what this labeled knowledge represents. I am talking
about the qualitative nature, of the label itself, which has nothing
to do with the fact that this quality can be thought of as a label
on our knowledge to tell us the nature of things it represents.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJPayv1Cx3yNRGGLb6erKWy2go0Vk_cFkwnyw1Km+Sd5-izkVw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div> <br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">> the focus about
what is reasonable to believe about REDNESS, suddenly
switching to the causal, and zombie red? </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It's still not clear to me what "zombie red" means.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
You know what the qualitative nature of the taste of salt is,
right? And would you agree that the word salt, does not have this
quality? And would you agree that unless you know how to properly
interpret the word "salt", you can't know the intended qualitative
meaning. In other words, since salt, by definition, does not have a
salty quality, and can only be thought of as if it did. The word
'salt' is zombie information about the qualitative nature of the
taste of salt.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJPayv1Cx3yNRGGLb6erKWy2go0Vk_cFkwnyw1Km+Sd5-izkVw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">> What happens if
this [qualia] switch is inverted, and it turns
greenness on? </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The short answer is I don't think anything would
happen, not subjectively and not objectively.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
This is only because in your simplistic theoretical world this isn't
possible. But you can re engineer yourself as follows, which must
force you to expand your theoretical world a bit. For the rest of
your life, you wear red green color inverting glasses. When you
first do this, it is difficult, because you know your knowledge of
things that reflect 650 NM light are represented with knowledge that
has or is tagged with a redness quality, and things that represent
things that reflect 700 nm light are reprsented with greenness. And
now this is backwards, making it difficult at first.<br>
<br>
Eventually, after a long period of time you will learn to associate
and bind the redness quality, with all the things before that were
green, and visa verse. It will become easy to say it is red (even
though you now know your knowledge is qualitatively made of or
tagged with greenness). And you will even start to associate the
warmth of redness with greenness, and so on. It will eventually
become very natural for you to be just as normal as it was, before,
but you will know that your knowledge is very qualitatively
different than before you put on those glasses.<br>
<br>
Now, let's imagine that a scientist had you, and a clone of
yourself, before you went through this qualitative inversion. The
prediction is, that the scientist would be able to read your mind,
using the Galant methods (only properly interpreted) and the clones
mind, and tell which of you had red green inverted elemental qualia.
And, the prediction is, that there are lots of people out there,
with very diverse qualitative representations of visible light, and
you will in this way know much more about the qualitative nature of
others conscious knowledge of visible light.<br>
<br>
The only way you will ever be able to understand the qualitative
nature of physics, is if you expand your theoretical models, to
include this kind of diversity of quality, and how to detect such.
Ultimately, if you want to bridge the qualitative knowledge gap, and
know what other minds are like, how might you eff and detect such
diverse ineffable qualities?<br>
<br>
Brent<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>