> http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/2004/HardProblem.htm
>
> Comments welcome...
>
> -- Ben G

I'm pretty sure that your (kind of a) solution is correct: it stays in a 
materialistic framework (no mind body dualism) and yet does not deny the
 existence of qualia (Like Dennett does). It is the most simple theory that
 'fits the data'.

There is, however, this problem: we'd like to know what the qualia are that
 correspond to all kinds of patterns. But we only know (or rather, are) the
 qualia corresponding to patterns in the brain. But we would like to know the
 experiences of bats, rocks, computers, hurricanes etc etc too. But of course 
the patterns of those systems do not occur in the human brain (maybe there's 
some resemblance). To experience the qualia of a certain system, you have to 
be that system (as was already pointed out by Nagel, as you surely know).

This barrier seems to entail that investigation into qualia of other type of
 systems than your own is impossible. Often I've wondered if there isn't some
 opening: changing into a system, and then see what you experience. But if
 the system is not cognitive like a rock or a hurricane, it's hopeless. And
 changing into a bat won't work either because such creatures are not able to
 be introspective. Changing into another similarly (to us) intelligent 
lifeform (and back) may be the only option (in the far far future).

But to get back to our brains, I can imagine that a (near) perfect
 correlation between certain brain processes (in a very precise (molecular)
 description) and certain simultaneaous qualia (in a precise phenomenological
 description) are going to be found. Then we know about certain physical
 processes (these brain processes) what their qualia are (or: what qualia they 
are. And then maybe, we could start to vary these processes, and see how 
experience changes with them. And maybe then we could find patterns/law-like 
behaviour in that that allow us to predict what experience will result from 
certain (mutated) brain processes. An maybe then we can extrapolate to very 
different systems (non-cognitive?) than human beings. Maybe maybe maybe.... 
of course, it's all very speculative.

What is clear to me is that qualia research is not so much a part of
 psychology, but much more a part of elementary particle physics, because
 what the qualia-pattern identity theory says (according to me) is that
 qualia are just what physical processes are in themselves (as opposed to: 
'are for us' e.g. modelled with mathematics). Psychology only plays a role 
beacuse of the fact that human beings are our only entrance to investigate 
qualia.

Bye,
Arnoud M

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to