On 31 March 2015 at 01:08, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Monday, March 30, 2015, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 30 March 2015 at 19:26, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Fading qualia in the setting of normal behaviour, if logically >>> possible, would destroy the common idea of consciousness that we have. >>> It would mean, for example, that you could have gone blind last week >>> but not realise it. You would look at a painting, describe the >>> painting, have an emotional response to the painting - but lack any >>> visual experience of the painting. If that is possible, what meaning >>> is left to attribute to the word "qualia"? >>> >>> Well, it would mean that comp is false, because the electronic >> replacements are not generating any conscious experience despite having >> their I/O matched to the rest of the brain. That would mean there is >> something else involved, something that isn't generated by computation. >> > > But if that were so it would allow the above described situation, where > you could lack qualia but it would make no difference to you, rendering > the idea of consciousness meaningless. > > I thought the idea of fading qualia was that it *would* make a difference? Like you find yourself unable to appreciate some particular sensation as you used to? Otherwise why "fading" ? -- 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/d/optout.
