<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Hi Flexman,<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/30/2015 10:47 AM, Flexman, Connor
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA++aaA-Wi3aqrjbVK6nDpLzJW6JMTv+tqNBhfkaQGHD2VSXgnw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><span style="font-family:'times new
roman',serif;font-size:large">But why does the
mind experience 650 nm light as a qualia? How
could it not, if the mind experiences a
sensation then it is a qualia by definition. I
mean, how in the world could we experience 650
nm light as 650 nm light?</span><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
I definitely agree with John here: our brain has to process
some neuronal firing as an experience, a qualia. </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I agree with John, Also, in the same way that I agree with flat
earthers, when they say" "The sun goes around me every day." If you
want to live in that little flat earth world, then, OK. But what a
about inverted qualia, or new blue you've never experienced before.
In your little world, you may not be interested in that, but I am
interested in a slightly more advanced world, that includes that
kind of stuff.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA++aaA-Wi3aqrjbVK6nDpLzJW6JMTv+tqNBhfkaQGHD2VSXgnw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Redness is the qualia of the neuron for
red firing.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
A great theoretical prediction, yes. (Could be falsified)<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA++aaA-Wi3aqrjbVK6nDpLzJW6JMTv+tqNBhfkaQGHD2VSXgnw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> Anger is the qualia of the neurons for
aggression (or anger itself?) firing.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yes.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA++aaA-Wi3aqrjbVK6nDpLzJW6JMTv+tqNBhfkaQGHD2VSXgnw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">These things are just our internal view
(being inside an algorithm).</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Well, could be, but you are starting to velar off into not well
defined metaphysical like non detectable stuff.<br>
<br>
What, exactly, in your world is an "internal view" How do you
detect, especially the qualitative nature, of whatever this
"internal view" is? And what, physically does it mean to "be inside
an algorithm"? How would you prove to everyone that you are
physically "inside an algorithm"? Remember, if you know something,
there must be something physical that is that knowledge. And if you
know something, qualitatively, like a redness quality, there must be
something, detectable, that is responsible for that redness
qualitative nature. You must keep things physical, or else it is
metaphysical.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA++aaA-Wi3aqrjbVK6nDpLzJW6JMTv+tqNBhfkaQGHD2VSXgnw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> Note it's not really a qualia caused
by the neuron, it just is our experience of that thing. I
personally still don't understand why we necessarily
experience qualia, and why my perception exists in this brain,
but I don't think getting metaphysical helps with this
question.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Connor<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Exactly, you must not be metaphysical, as you seem to be leaning.
The paper is about "Detecting Qualia"
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vxfbgfm8XIqkmC5Vus7wBb982JMOA8XMrTZQ4smkiyI/edit">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vxfbgfm8XIqkmC5Vus7wBb982JMOA8XMrTZQ4smkiyI/edit</a>
. If you are willing to expand your naive model of physics, just a
bit, you will discover a very phenomenal physical (that means
detectable) world.<br>
<br>
Brent Allsop<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>