<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Brent Allsop wrote:<br>
<br>
>Precisely the reason I fight against anti qualia transhumanists
is because in my belief, you are part of the problem. Everyone can
know, absolutely, that our knowledge of [image: red_border.png], is
different from a code like "*RED*". And I'm sorry, in my opinion, as
much as you know about neuroscience, to me, and many religious
people, when you make the claims you make about qualities, like
this, you completely destroy your reputation in their eyes.<br>
<br>
Well you are mistaken. In my opinion.<br>
<br>
Everyone does know that there's a difference between the experience
of something and a label used to refer to the experience. Nobody is
disputing this. Nobody thinks that the title "War and Peace" is the
same thing as the entire book. You seem to be claiming that some
people (most of the scientifically-literate people on this list, for
starters) are mixing the two things up. If that is your claim, it's
false.<br>
<br>
<font size="4">> </font>when you make the claims you make about
qualities, like this<br>
<br>
What claims? You are the one making claims about 'qualities'
(whatever they are supposed to be), with nothing to back them up,
except intuition.<br>
<br>
What we are saying is that the experiences that we have are dynamic
patterns (very complex patterns) of information. We use simple
labels (e.g. "pineapple") to communicate a very complex pattern of
information that is the experience each one of us has (experiences
which could very well - and almost certainly are, although we can't
tell for certain - be completely different) in response to seeing,
eating, smelling or reading about, a pineapple.<br>
<br>
When I say "I can taste pineapple", I'm using the label that I,
personally, link to the complex pattern of information in my brain
that is active while I'm tasting pineapple, to evoke in someone
else, their own personal complex pattern of information in their
brain that is active when they are tasting pineapple.<br>
<br>
Naturally, as we all have many small differences in physiology and
anatomy and neurology, it's extremely unlikely (and completely
irrelevant) that we experience exactly the same thing. All we can
know is that we can both point to the same object (a pineapple) and
agree that the phrase "I can taste pineapple" refers to 'the taste
of pineapple', whatever that is to each of us.<br>
<br>
I can't see how this is remotely controversial. I don't see why we
are arguing over it.<br>
<br>
Neuroscientists can demonstrate, in any number of actual experiments
(as opposed to arguments), that complex neural patterns are what
occur when people experience things. They can demonstrate, in actual
experiments, that in the absence of these patterns, the experiences
do not occur.<br>
<br>
I don't know what else I can say, or what else anybody needs.<br>
<br>
(and I should point out that, as far as I know, nobody knows what on
earth you mean when you say 'knowledge of', as you insist on doing
in front of just about everything. If it really does add something,
you really need to explain it, because it's a good example of the
'impenetrable personal jargon' that people keep complaining about)<br>
<br>
Ben<br>
</body>
</html>