Re: More on qualia of consciousness and occam's razor

From: Stathis Papaioannou <stathispapaioannou.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:05:52 +1100

Bruno Marchal wrote on 17 Feb 04:

QUOTE-


Stathis Papaioannou wrote (and Eric Cavalcanti did assess it)


    Actually, you probably _could_ drive your brain into "seeing red" if you
knew exactly what physical processes occur in the brain in response to a red
stimulus, and if you had appropriate neural interface equipment. Such
capabilities do not currently exist - not even close - but the idea is the
basis of many SF stories (eg. William Gibson, Greg Egan). The same sort of
thing frequently occurs naturally: the definition of a hallucination is a
perception without the stimulus that would normally give rise to that
perception. The point is, even if you knew in perfect detail what happens in
your brain when you see red, you would not actually know/feel/experience the
qualia unless you ran the software on your own hardware.




Of course I mainly agree with Stathis here, and with Eric's
assessment, but Stathis formulates it in just the way which
makes people abusing the box analogy. Indeed, the only way
to actually know/feel/experience the qualia is to "run" the right
software, which really *defines* the owner.
The choice of hardware makes no difference. The owner
of the hardware makes no difference. This is because the owner
is really defined by the (running) software.
To be even more exact, there is eventually
no need for running the software, because eventually the box
itself is a construction of the mind, and is defined by the
(possible) software/owner.
That illustrates also that you cannot see "blue" as someone else
sees "blue" by running the [someone else's software] on
"your hardware", because if you run [someone else's software]
on your hardware, you will just duplicate that someone-else,
and your hardware will become [someone else's hardware!]
And *you* will just disappear (locally).

Bruno

-ENDQUOTE

Well yes, the mind IS the software. I am reminded of a frequent discussion I
have with schizophrenic patients who have improved on medication and then
think they no longer need it. I warn them that on other occasions when they
have done this their delusions have returned and they have ended up in
hospital, to be restabilised on antipsychotic medication. "That will never
happen again," they confidently say, "because I now know those thoughts were
crazy, and if they recur, I will be able to think rationally and hence
dismiss them". Now, a psychotic delusion occurs(due to complex and poorly
understood neurochemical pathology) precisely because the mind/brain
dysfunction causes the patient to think IRrationally; so what are they going
to use to talk their ailing mind into seeing sense again? We may have an
extra kidney and lung for backup, but we only have one brain! Yet this is
how many people (not just the mentally ill) seem to see it: that they have
this magical "I" which can stand back and assess things no matter what is
actually going on inside their heads - as if they don't really believe they
think with their brain at all.

Stathis Papaioannou
Melbourne, Australia

_________________________________________________________________
Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/default.asp
Received on Tue Feb 17 2004 - 08:07:03 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:09 PST