Philosophy Now Forum

Raw thought believes there are qualia because he's been programmed as to what a triangle is, and qualia for that matter. A triangle can be seen by an infant, yet it's not a triangle, yet! It becomes a triangle with programming. There's your qualia, it's simply programming. From the object, light is reflected, entering the eyes, light sensing devices, where it's converted to electricity, traveling up nerve fibers firing, to the brain where it's stored like a recording, until someone comes along and gives it a name, and like a dutiful monkey, you do as you saw. There is no triangleness in the universal, it is only a definition, a programming of constituents so a human can manipulate that which it's programmed to manipulate. If it doesn't know what constituents make up a triangle, how can it ding it on cue, it has to also know what a dig is and what a cue is. None of these things are anything other than programming. Our brains are just organic computers, garbage in, garbage out, case in point, of course.

Qualia= simply the programmed definition, despite us not knowing the full definition completely, of what something is.

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:Consciousness is a localized entity, separate but spectating the brain.

Localised where?

raw_thought wrote:Unfortunately for the materialist there is nothing experienced (qualia) as a triangle.

Yes there is, there is the imagined image that we call a triangle which is the result of the CNS retrieving, as much as is possible, of the pattern laid down when the triangle was sensed in the first place.

Qualia=subjective and private. Pain is subjective and private. My visualized triangle is subjective and private. Materialists do not believe in anything that is subjective and private(qualia). Therefore a materialist believes that there is nothing pain feels like and also that it is impossible to visualize a triangle.
If my ideas are programmed, makes no difference, my definitions are the agreed upon definitions of qualia and triangle.
The only way I can be wrong is if pain and my visualized triangle are not private. For example that there is an objective physical triangle in my brain when I visualize one. There is not,unless one takes the absurd position that in my brain there is the physical form of a triangle. That one could see a triangle in my brain. Also,if one had a sound amplifier one could hear my thoughts in English! That is also obviously absurd.

So there is no universal that represents the concept "triangle"? That is absurd. I can identify a triangle. If there were no concept "triangle" that would be impossible.

Arising_uk wrote:

raw_thought wrote:Unfortunately for the materialist there is nothing experienced (qualia) as a triangle.

Yes there is, there is the imagined image that we call a triangle which is the result of the CNS retrieving, as much as is possible, of the pattern laid down when the triangle was sensed in the first place.

So those neurons are firing in a triangular shape?? That is easily proven false,as I did previously. Scroll back, I have repeatedly said that it is possible (and even probable ) that my neurons facilitate my visualized triangle. However, as I have said many times, that has nothing to do with my argument. See the two posts just above this one, they are scaled down version of my 1-9 argument. Seriously, why keep making superfluous and points unrelated to the argument?

raw_thought wrote:Qualia=subjective and private. Pain is subjective and private. My visualized triangle is subjective and private. Materialists do not believe in anything that is subjective and private(qualia). Therefore a materialist believes that there is nothing pain feels like and also that it is impossible to visualize a triangle.

Subjective an private doesn't necessarily equate to qualia. This seems to be the sticking point.

That is the definition of qualia. According to materialists there is nothing private about my visualized triangle or my feeling pain. If they were not private experiences they would not be qualia.

Every materialist would agree that if my pain is private, it would be a quale.

raw_thought wrote:Every materialist would agree that if my pain is private, it would be a quale.

This is not what the literature tells us. For the materialist there is no first person perspective.

???
Yes! For a materialist there is no first person narrative. That is why a description of pain (how it feels) is meaningless for a materialist.
Are you agreeing with me ? Obviously, the materialist's position is absurd.

My "if" is like saying, "if rocks were lighter then air they would float."It does not mean that I believe that rocks are lighter then air.
In other words I was saying that a materialist agrees with my definition of qualia. I am not saying that he believes that qualia exist.

raw_thought wrote:???
Yes! For a materialist there is no first person narrative. That is why a description of pain (how it feels) is meaningless for a materialist.
Are you agreeing with me ? Obviously, the materialist's position is absurd.

Yes, I agree the materialist perspective in untenable. The problem appears to be that we are agreeing for different reasons.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Raw thought believes there are qualia because he's been programmed as to what a triangle is, and qualia for that matter. A triangle can be seen by an infant, yet it's not a triangle, yet! It becomes a triangle with programming. There's your qualia, it's simply programming. From the object, light is reflected, entering the eyes, light sensing devices, where it's converted to electricity, traveling up nerve fibers firing, to the brain where it's stored like a recording, until someone comes along and gives it a name, and like a dutiful monkey, you do as you saw. There is no triangleness in the universal, it is only a definition, a programming of constituents so a human can manipulate that which it's programmed to manipulate. If it doesn't know what constituents make up a triangle, how can it ding it on cue, it has to also know what a dig is and what a cue is. None of these things are anything other than programming. Our brains are just organic computers, garbage in, garbage out, case in point, of course.

Qualia= simply the programmed definition, despite us not knowing the full definition completely, of what something is.

In other words according to you pain does not feel like anything, there are only c-fibers firing. We understand that. That is what the debate is about. Simply stating your position is not an argument.

My visualized triangle is private. No one can see it except me. Even if one had advanced scientific instruments one would not see a triangle in my brain (neurons firing in a triangular shape etc). My visualized triangle is a intrinsically private experience. Quale is defined as an intrinsically private experience.