Re: qualia
Brent Allsop (allsop@fc.hp.com)
Mon, 29 Nov 1999 21:31:46 -0700 (MST)
Dan Fabulich <daniel.fabulich@yale.edu> said:
> Consider this question: It is natural to say that the sun revolves
> around the earth; we refer to the "rising/setting sun" as if we
> believed that this was what was really going on. Why? Because it
> SEEMS like the sun revolves around the earth. But what would it
> seem like if the earth revolved around the sun?
With your usage of "believed" and "SEEMS" you are making the
same mistake Danial Dennett makes when he says there are no qualia "It
only seems like there are" in Consciousness explained.
What do you mean when you use such terms? A false believing
or a "seeming" is a representation in our conscious mind that is not
accurately representing its referent. For example, when we place a
straight pencil in a glass of water it "seems" to be bent. In other
words, our representation of the pencil in our consciousness is truly
and really bent, while the pencil beyond our senses is not bent at
all. Though the seeming is an inaccurate representation of it's
referent, it still really is what it is in our consciousness.
Given this, Danial's assertion that it only "seems" that we
have qualia is obviously absurd. He is saying something like we have
a qualia representation or an inaccurate conscious knowledge of us
having qualia, but this conscious knowledge or qualia inaccurately
represents it's referent?
Brent Allsop