<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">On Sat, May 14, 2016, Brent Allsop </span><span dir="ltr" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><<a href="mailto:brent.allsop@canonizer.com" target="_blank">brent.allsop@canonizer.com</a>></span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> wrote:</span><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<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"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>We are talking about two different thing here. There is the
manufacturing process, and then there is what is manufactured. </div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">I don't understand your distinction. If I make a book and the book makes money then I make money. The information in DNA makes a brain and the brain makes the subjective red qualia, therefore DNA makes the the subjective red qualia; or at least that's what happened with my DNA and my brain. </font></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"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>Would you agree that there are likely other ways of building
what is responsible for an elemental redness and greenness qualities
besides DNA manufacturing?</div></blockquote><div><br></div><font size="4">Yes I would agree with that and I would also agree that I am not the only conscious being in the universe, although I can't prove either one and never will.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> But there are some things I can prove although the proof is available only to me. I know with rock sold certainty that energy, just 25 different kinds of parts, and a assembly instruction booklet less than a million lines long (and probably a lot less) the subjective experience of red can be produced. I strongly suspect, although can not prove, that other people's DNA gives them subjective experiences too. </div></font><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"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>So you are saying that qualia will eternally be ineffable or not
understandable / mapable / observable, </div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><font size="4">Ineffable may be too grand a word, it's not that there is some deep truth that our puny human minds can never grasp, it's just that the chain of "what caused that?" questions is not infinitely long and some things are just brute facts. And after saying that consciousness is what data feels like when it is being processed there is simply nothing more to be said on the subject of consciousness. Evolutionary Biology has been screaming in our ear since 1859 that consciousness is a inevitable byproduct of intelligent behavior and I think it's high time to listen to what it's saying, </font></div><font size="4"> </font></div><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"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>I am predicting that there
is an elemental, fully understandable / mapable qualia level,</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">And I predict that if Darwin was right then qualia effects behavior and behavior effects qualia and thus the Turing Test works for consciousness and not just intelligence. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">I further predict that Darwin was right.</div></font></div><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"> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>especially for qualia like redness and greenness.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div> And that we can
detect, understand, a communicate the quality</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font></div>I can detect redness no doubt about it, and when I talk about it to other English speakers they seem to understand what I mean, and I understand that when matter that is organized in a johnkclarkian way interacts with 630 manometer electromagnetic waves a red qualia is produced. What more is needed?<div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> </font></div> </font></div><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"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">></div>Would you agree that an abstract
symbol like the word "red" does not have a redness quality? </div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">Symbols don't exist is isolation. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">The symbol "red" must exist in a environment that understand English otherwise "red" is not a symbol at all it's just a squiggle, but with people who can read English it manufacture the quail red qualia in them. Likewise in all cells on this planet the sequence of bases CUA in DNA symbolizes the amino acid </div>Leucine<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">, but in the biology on another planet it might symbolize another amino acid or is might be meaningless and symbolize nothing at all.</div></font></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><font size="4"><br></font></div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><font size="4"> John K Clark</font></div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br></div><br></div></div>