Qualia

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 12:51 am

Even concepts feel like something. See the two links I gave,"symbol grounding problem" and the academic article,"what is it like to know P"
When I say "feelings" I am not just referring to emotions.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Mon May 11, 2015 12:52 am

raw_thought wrote:Pain hurts.

How does it hurt?

Bed sheets feel smooth and soft.

Sack-cloth one's or to eczema patient?

Poetry would be gibberish if feelings did not exist.

It pretty much is.

Psychology would also be gibberish if feelings did not exist and therefore could not be expressed. ...

It pretty much is, regardless of whether feelings exist or not.

Imagine telling your shrink, ". I feel my c-fibers firing" or I dont have any feelings for my wife, I only know that particular neurons are firing.

With the advances being made I think the psycho-analyst is likely to disappear in the near future.
p.s.
I've started reading Dennett's book and so far I think you are misrepresenting his position with respect to qualia but maybe it changes at the end. Although I can see that you are a dualist and why you would oppose his approach.

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 1:05 am

He will sneak in towards the end that feelings do not exist etc.
Poetry is gibberish? Yeah tyhat Shakespeare was like a monkey on a typewriter!

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 1:08 am

Psychology is gibberish? So if I say that Bob has an inferiority complex or is sad, that is meaningless. It would be better to ask him if his c fibers are firing. Or are you saying that talking about how we feel in a situation will not help a relationship? My wife and I strongly disagree.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Mon May 11, 2015 1:09 am

raw_thought wrote:Poetry is gibberish? Yeah tyhat Shakespeare was like a monkey on a typewriter!

His plays are mainly prose.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Mon May 11, 2015 1:12 am

raw_thought wrote:Psychology is gibberish? So if I say that Bob has an inferiority complex or is sad, that is meaningless.

Pretty much if your aim is to assist him with whatever ails him. Upon the whole I find the psycho-analytic schools more interested in defending their theories rather than helping people solve their issues.

You talk about Psychology but this they try their best to remove all first-person narratives from their experiments and studies.

It would be better to ask him if his c fibers are firing. ...

Nope, you'd be better off asking him what he wants.

Or are you saying that talking about how we feel in a situation will not help a relationship?

For sure but only after one has taken first, second and third position before speaking.

My wife and I strongly disagree.

Sure, how do you decide who's feelings take precedent?

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:10 am

I am not saying whose feelings take precedence. (for a materialist sharing our feelings is gibberish anyway). I am saying that it is obvious that our conversations are meaningful and productive.

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:11 am

What he wants? That is gibberish! That is a first person narrative!

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:12 am

Arising_uk wrote:
raw_thought wrote:Poetry is gibberish? Yeah tyhat Shakespeare was like a monkey on a typewriter!
His plays are mainly prose.

There is no poetic imagery???

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:20 am

Of course there is the epiphenomonlist position, that feelings are real but dont exist. I confess I have never been able to understand that. I have read the literature but it seems like word games and nothing of substance.

Wyman · Post by **Wyman** » Mon May 11, 2015 2:15 pm

raw_thought wrote:I did not prove that my visualized triangle is not physical?
If it is physical,there is a physical object in my brain that has the form of a triangle.
If there is no physical object in my brain shaped like a triangle then my visualized triangle is not physical.

Nope.

What is a physical object? Is a quantum particle a physical object? Is it physical?

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 9:00 pm

Quantum particles have more in common with mind then matter. They lack a location, etc.
I am not saying that quantum particles are mind, or thoughts. I am saying that their properties are more in line with mind then matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1YqgPAtzho
Yes, that is a silly video and from a silly movie. However, I have asked my physicist friends and they say that it is fundamentally accurate.* Besides its fun!

* Even an idiot can sometimes say something profound.

raw_thought · Post by **raw_thought** » Mon May 11, 2015 9:59 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/opini ... .html?_r=0
http://web.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/Writin ... Ferris.htm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-poir ... 43042.html
If that is matter, then sure qualia are matter!!!!!!

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Mon May 11, 2015 11:47 pm

raw_thought wrote:There is no poetic imagery???

You mean metaphor? Is that poetry?

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Mon May 11, 2015 11:48 pm

raw_thought wrote:What he wants? That is gibberish! That is a first person narrative!

Not if you accept Dennett's idea of hetrophenomenology.

Philosophy Now Forum

Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia

Re: Qualia