<div dir="ltr"><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Hi Stathis,</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If it isn’t a physical property,
then the best it could be is: “A miracle happens here”. That alone (along with all the other
resulting “hard” problems) proves to me you’ve got a mistake somewhere in your
logic. And given how detailed I describe
the problem with this logic, I don’t understand how you can’t see this.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Pluss splitting everting into just
A, B, and C is so far aware from any qualia, and what qualia are is completely irrelevant. As I’ve tried to point out repeatedly, you
not including the required functionality.
You’ve got to include the colorness functionality (redness, greenness…)
in the system,, and finally a binding mechanism which can computationally bind colorness
together, so you can have a composite qualitative experience composed of lots
of them.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">So, let’s assume your B performs the
required binding functionality. You said
a and b could be “Chemical Signals.” We
can throw out b because that is causally way downstream from the qualia pixels elements
we can both objectively observe and consciously be directly aware of, would be
aware of, presenting to a binding system.
a must be whatever it is that is the colorness quale (redness, greenness….)
we can detect by being aware of its quality computationally bound to lots of
other pixels of colorness. I say colorness,
a, is a physical property, evidently you think a is just magic. And there must be more than just B(a). Since we can have at least 10s of thousands
of pixels of awareness for each pixel on a surface we can see. So it must be B(a1, a2, a3…. aN) Where n is at least tens of thousands of elemental
“magic” qualities which can be bound into one unified conscious experience by
B.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">A required functionality of binding mechanism
B is the ability to recognize physical (or magic) red. If it is glutamate that has the redness
quality we can directly experience, B (and B1) must be able to report being
aware that anything but glutamate (or redness or magic) being presented to any aN
must be able to report, by being aware of that physical or qualitative (or
magic?) difference, that it is not glutamate.
If it can’t do that, then it isn’t functioning properly.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Also, if you are able to do some
kind of substitution from B to B1, you must be able to use B1, to bind to the
neuro substituted system, so you can be computationally aware of whether it is
using glutamate, glycine, 1s, or 0s (or whatever redness or greenness magic you
are thinking of.)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If you provide the computational
binding system which can do all of the above required functionality including
the colorness (whether magic or physical) there will be no “hard” problems. If you can describe such a sufficient system
that has any other problems than an approachable color problem, I will join the
functionalist camp.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">You seem to have constructed your argument
in such a way that nothing will falsify your thinking that colorness must be
magic, resulting in all the 'hard' problems chalmers has become famous for?</span></p></div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">---------- Forwarded message ---------<br>From: <strong class="gmail_sendername" dir="auto">Stathis Papaioannou</strong> <span dir="auto"><<a href="mailto:stathisp@gmail.com">stathisp@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 9:12 PM<br>Subject: Re: [ExI] Chalmers<br>To: Brent Allsop <<a href="mailto:brent.allsop@gmail.com">brent.allsop@gmail.com</a>><br></div><br><br><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 09:39, Brent Allsop <<a href="mailto:brent.allsop@gmail.com" target="_blank">brent.allsop@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">But if the argument contains a <a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/79-Neural-Substtn-Fallacy/2#statement" style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:blue" target="_blank">mistake
of logic or slight of hand</a>, then this argument for functionalism is falsified,
resulting in it being more likely that functionalism IS probably wrong?</span></p></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If functionalism is wrong then it means that your qualia could change radically and you wouldn’t notice, which seems absurd.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p></div>
</blockquote></div></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Stathis Papaioannou</div>
</div></div>