On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 11:14:16AM -0500, Ben Goertzel wrote: > > Qualia are *not* (at present) a scientific theory. They are part of a > description of subjective experience.
Yes, we're all soaking in it, but how does experiencing the subjective help us building AI or building animal simulations accurate enough to show individual variations? > Science is very valuable, but it is not the only worthwhile way of > describing, communicating or having experience. I'm not denying I'm having an experience. What I'm denying that there is anything interesting or valuable in that insight. It's all boring emergent stuff. Not linked to a meat puppet, or even a particular arrangement of atoms or bits. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpMWEIfqHPhQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
