On Monday, February 24, 2014, David Nyman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 22 February 2014 05:59, Stathis Papaioannou > <[email protected]<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> > > wrote: > > If we make a bet we can never settle, since the idea is that if the >> replacement is technically perfect the subject's behaviour will be >> normal, and behaviour includes displays of emotion and verbal >> descriptions of internal states. >> > > It would be interesting to speculate what fading qualia would be like in > our own case, though. Would we hear ourselves continue to refer to qualia > that we no longer possessed? Perhaps that's as near as we can come to a > reductio of the whole idea. However, if I've grasped the way comp > formulates this, it becomes inconsistent to suspect any correct and > truthful machine of referring to qualia that it does not "in fact" possess > in some distinct sense. > John Searle in one of his papers proposes that if our brain were being gradually replaced we would find ourselves losing qualia while declaring that everything was normal, and being unable to make any protest to the contrary. This would imply that we think with something other than our brain, a soul equivalent, and that in certain situations the brain and this soul equivalent can become decoupled. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
