<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>We are just talking about two different things.</div><div>You guys are talking about an abstract code word "red" which is, by design, independent of whatever changing physical property is representing it at any time, or in any different brain, of any age, as long as the grounding dictionary for the abstract term is updated appropriately.</div><div><br></div><div>Giovani mentioned:</div><div><br></div><div>> As we experience<br>> red in early childhood, and throughout life, we create a different<br>> perception of red that can be refined or sometimes degraded. It is not<br>> a fixed forever thing in the brain but it is always changing and<br>> modifying. This again destroys completely Brent's misconception about<br>> what redness is.</div><div><br></div><div>You said "redness" in that last line but didn't you mean to say code word "red" instead of redness, it's referent? At least using my unambiguous and well grounded terminology, it would be more clear.</div><div><br></div><div>Others have also talked about how knowledge of colors can change, due to language and tastes can grow and expand based on practice and experience.</div><div><br></div><div>It is THESE changes that I am talking about. What are the physical changes that are responsible for these subjective changes, and what are they like before and after those changes?</div><div><br></div><div>On the other thread Jason also indicated: "I still think qualities are encoded in neural patterns." completely misunderstanding that a redness quality is a physical fact, that does not need decoding like a code word.</div><div><br></div><div>The question that "destroys completely" your ability to understand what qualities are (resulting in all kinds of 'hard problems' and ineffability) is: How do you decode that encoding?</div><div>How do you find out what a person's redness is like when they were younger and how is it different, now that they are now older?</div><div><br></div><div>The way you guys are talking, it is all perceptions of interpretations of perceptions. Since you guys have no grounding, people point out that you suffer from a symbol grounding problem. That is the only reason you think subjective qualities are ineffable.</div><div><br></div><div>It's no wonder you say you don't know what I'm talking about, when I use the term quality. There are no qualities in abstract text and codes. You simply need to ground your abstract codes with a pointer to a particular physical property in a color image. You need to point to a particular physical redness quality and say THAT is what redness was like when he was young, and it has now changed to this different quality now that he is older. That is grounded, unambiguous terminology, enabling effing of what is, for you guys, ineffable.</div><div><br></div><div>Who did you say is the one using confusing, ambiguous, non grounded ineffable terminology that has no meaning?</div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 1:11 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"><br>
On 09/04/2023 23:50, Giovanni Santostasi wrote:<br>
> Let me elaborate on a point. When I say the pattern matters it doesn't <br>
> mean that a particular pattern matters. This is very relevant to <br>
> dismantle Brent's position. I can use any pattern I want to represent <br>
> red. In fact, let me expand on my previous statement: what matters is <br>
> the pattern AND the association with a given visual stimuli (in the <br>
> case of red) or a given thought or memory or whatever. If I associate <br>
> this pattern with seeing red (probably a given number of times) then <br>
> that is red in my brain. Given we have similar makeup and there is a <br>
> lot of software we inherit from our progenitors the association <br>
> process (basically we come with a lot of NN weights that are <br>
> pre-trained) is somehow pre-programmed up to a point. As we experience <br>
> red in early childhood, and throughout life, we create a different <br>
> perception of red that can be refined or sometimes degraded. It is not <br>
> a fixed forever thing in the brain but it is always changing and <br>
> modifying. This again destroys completely Brent's misconception about <br>
> what redness is.<br>
<br>
<br>
Thank-you Giovanni.<br>
<br>
You have put, much more clearly and concisely, what I've been trying, on <br>
and off, to say for years.<br>
<br>
And without a single mention of 'quality', 'knowledge of' or 'abstract' <br>
to confuse things.<br>
Well done.<br>
<br>
Ben<br>
_______________________________________________<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></div>