<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 12:01 PM Adrian Tymes 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 dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 11:28 PM Giovanni Santostasi via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">What is a QUALITY????<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>A subjective little pile of interpretations.<br><br>*sips from glass before tossing it aside* </div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This answer reveals the key lack of understanding of definitions, causing all the confusion in this conversation.</div><div><br></div><div>All the supporters of <a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Theories-of-Consciousness/6-Representational-Qualia">RQT</a>, People that write papers talking about an "explanatory gaps", a "hard problems" and people asking questions like "what is it like to be a bat" and "What did black and white color scientists mary learn" are all trying to point out that "A subjective little pile of interpretations" is the opposite of what a quality is.</div><div><br></div><div>We all learned a bunch of facts and names about color in elementary school. All these facts were correct, except for one.</div><div><br></div><div>We learned that the physical quality of a ripe strawberry is 'red'. The color property of a leaf is 'green'.</div><div>We learned that the reason the strawberry reflects 750 nm (red) light is because the quality property of the strawberry is red.</div><div>We learned that the only way to define a word like 'red' is to point to that particular physical property and say: "THAT is red."</div><div><br></div><div>All these facts are correct, except that a redness quality is not a quality of the strawberry, it is a physical quality property of our knowledge of the strawberry.</div><div>Redness is the final physical result of the perception process, it is not the initial physical cause.</div><div>It is a physical quality of something in our brain. Something in our brain is behaving the way it does, because of its redness quality.</div><div>Objectively "seeing" or "detecting" the behavior of whatever this is tells us nothing of what that quality is like.</div><div>Again, the only way to communicate what a quality is like, is to point to something that has that property and say: "THAT is redness"</div><div>"red" is a very different property than "redness". "Red" is the label for something that reflects or emits 'red' light. "Redness is a quality of something which your brain uses to represent knowledge of red things with.</div><div><br></div><div>Let's assume that the neurotransmitter glutamate has a colorness quality you have never experienced before. In other words, the reason it behaves the way it does in a synapse, is because of its grue quality.</div><div>You (and black and white marry) can learn everything about glutamat. You can accurately describe everything about it's behavior in a synapse, and so on. But, untill you computationally bind that glutamate into your consciousness, and dirrectly aprehend the q</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div>