KPJ wrote:
> [...]
> Why can't humans explain ``qualia'' just as any other
> natural phenomenon, given enough time, and experimental
> data?
The problem is with performing the experiment. If I build a
machine capable of experiencing qualia how do I test that it
is, in fact, experiencing qualia? I cannot experience the
machines qualia without *being* the machine. I can only
draw conclusions based on my own assumptions.
As I recall, John K. Clark assumes the existence of qualia
based on experience and Dan Fabulich claims we have no
reason to make such assumptions. The only way to settle
this dispute is to find evidence that qualia do not exist.
BM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:59 MDT