Eli, Calling qualia a "substance" is indeed an error, and one which many philosophers have avoided. E.g. in Peirce's metaphysics, qualia are First whereas substance is Second.
However, the fact that no substance of qualia exists, doesn't eliminate the mystery. Nor does it mean that talk of "qualia" is meaningless. Words (such as "qualia") can meaningfully denote non-substances... I long ago gave up on trying to convince hard-core empiricists that non-empirical, non-"substantial" phenomena (like experiences or qualia) can actually exist. I don't seem to have a common grounding for the word "existence" with such people. (And I'm not sure if you fall into the category of hard-core empiricists or not.) As I understand it, hard-core empiricists believe that there is a physical reality which is actually existent, and we humans are physical systems within this reality, and "mind" is a way of talking about some of the activities of these physical systems. While I respect this as an often useful perspective, I can also take the perspective that my mind is primary, and sensations and ideas arise within it, and among these sensations and ideas are the ideas of the physical world, a body, a brain, science, physics. From this point of view there is nothing at all mistaken or nonsensical in thinking about qualia as existing separately from physical reality, yet still being in a sense fully existent and real. I know of no way to convince a hard-core empiricist that the subjectivist view of the world is at least equally valid. What's funny to me is that I see hard-core empiricism as a form of dogmatism, somewhat similar to religious fundamentalism. From an inner, experiential point of view, both "God" and "physical reality" are ideas that the mind conceives in order to organize its experiences. Clinging onto any one of these ideas as absolutely real and existent is IMO a mistake. -- Ben > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Eliezer > Yudkowsky > Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 10:42 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: What are qualia... > > > Qualia are the modern version of a very, very old mistake, that > of reifying > a mystery as a substance. Cognitive phlogiston. > > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ > Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence > > ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
