<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br><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">Hi Ben,</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">Yes, thanks for asking questions about
my intentions instead of just dismissing me as an idiot. I’ve answered this question multiple times on
this list, but I guess you haven’t seen this yet so let me try again.</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">There is evidence of a clear consensus
around qualia as indicated in “<a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Representational-Qualia/6" style="color:blue">Representational
Qualia Theory</a>”. The only
disagreement is what is the nature of qualia, as you can see in the many
competing sub camps.</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">In order to communicate the general
ideas contained in <a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Representational-Qualia/6" style="color:blue">RQT</a> about how
to eff the ineffable, why it is qualia blind to only use one word “red” for all
things red, and why the so called impossibly “hard mind body problem” is really
just a color problem and all that (already a somewhat difficult task to
communicate) Of all the theories of
qualia, we take the most straight forward, easiest to falsify “<a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Molecular-Materialism/36" style="color:blue">Molecular
Materialism</a>” theory, and we go way
beyond even that, for simplicity sake.
We imagine an imaginary world where there are only two colors red and
green. Not even any other shades of
color – just red and green. And in this
overly simplistic world it is glutamate reacting in a synapse that has the
elemental pixel quality of redness, and glycine that has the elemental quality
of greenness. All this, so we can say
things like glutamate has a color property of white (it reflects white light)
and it has a colorness quality of redness.
Our abstract descriptions of how glutamate behaves in a synapse is one
and the same as what we directly experience as elemental redness.</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, if someone thinks redness =
glutamate has been falsified, just substitute some other set of physics in the
brain that hasn’t’ yet been falsified.
Replace every occurrence of glutamate, above, with whatever that things is.</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 think there is a more likely
theory than glutamate = redness (it must be very falsifiable, as most competing
theories of “molecular materialism, it isn’t clear how to falsify them) I would be happy to substitute whatever you
think could be a description of the necessary and sufficient set of physics
that is a description of what we directly experience as redness. And of course, it would be great if you would
create a camp for what you think is most likely, so we can see how many other
people agree with you, compared to competing theories. You still haven’t fully falsified Molecular
Materialism for me, so I’m still supporting that as my top working hypothesis choice.</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"> </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">The problem is, everyone gets lost
in the minor details everyone disagrees on, and focuses on that. While completely missing what all the experts
agree is important (that which is contained in <a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Molecular-Materialism/36" style="color:blue">RQT</a>.) That is the power of cononizer – the ability
to push disagreements into lower level sub camps, out of the way of building
consensus around what most experts agree is important:” There is no hard mind
body problem, it’s just that nobody knows what color anything is.</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, Ben, Please. From here on out, whenever I say glutamate,
please replace that word with a description of whatever physics you most likely
think is a description of redness.</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></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:36 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
On 20/01/2020 19:32, Brent Allsop wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>OK very good points. So, let me see
if I can address these good points in the way I’m saying
things.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span style="font-size:12pt">If you do a neuro substitution from
redness physics to greenness physics, (and visa versa) that
would be possible
if, in one step, you replaced all the glutamate being
presented to the binding
neuron (including any possible memory of glutamates
colorness property) with glycine
and your memory of </span><span style="font-size:16px">glycine's</span><span style="font-size:12pt"> colorness property, that would be
possible as i've pointed out many times.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>But, still you must include this
binding neuron (or something that performs this required
functionality) in your
thought experiment, otherwise composite computationally bound
elemental
physical qualities like redness and greenness aren’t
possible. And also, this same binding mechanism must be able
to connect a pre inverted system, with a post inverted system,
so that you can see that redness and grenness are inverted.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<br>
Brent, I think the biggest problem here <i>is</i> the way you're
saying things. A way that, as I've already demonstrated, cannot
possibly reflect reality. As far as I know.<br>
<br>
You acknowledged my argument ("availability argument") as a good
one, but failed to respond to my reply, saying I think the argument
demolishes the idea of molecules being able to represent (or
contain, or whatever) qualia. My question "I've falsified the
theory, wouldn't you say?", was never answered. And now you continue
to talk about glutamate and glycine, etc., and 'physical rednesss'
being an 'elemental quality'. So I can only assume your answer is
"No".<br>
<br>
Obviously, if there's something wrong with my argument, I'd like to
know what it is, so please tell me!<br>
<br>
Unless you can show my argument to be wrong, you can't continue to
talk in these terms. Well, you can, of course, but how can you
expect anyone to take you seriously?<br>
<br>
So, please, either falsify my argument or stop talking about
molecules like glycine having a 'colourness property', which my
argument shows is impossible.<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Ben Zaiboc</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>