So, in addition to the empirical data, there is this extra bit of information, neither contained in the data nor able to be derived from it using the laws of physics: what it actually feels like to be the one experiencing the subjective sensation. If someone can think of a better way to describe it than "extra bit of information" or can come up with a way to formalise it, I would be happy to hear about it.
I suppose there will still be some who insist that if you know all about the physiology etc. behind the alien response to gamma rays, then you know all there is to know. I think this response is analogous to the "shut up and calculate" attitude to the interpretation of quantum mechanics.
From: "Ben Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: More on qualia of consciousness and occam's razor Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 11:34:22 -0500
> ; you might even be able to "read" the brain, scanning for neuronal
> activity and deducing correctly that the subject sees a red
> flash. However,
> it is impossible to know what it feels like to see a red flash unless you
> have the actual experience yourself.
> So I maintain that there is this extra bit of information -subjective
> experience or qualia - that you do not automatically have even if
> you know
> everything about the brain to an arbitrary level of precision.
In what sense is a quale "information"?
formalizing this might help me to understand your hypothesis better
Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/default.asp