FAWS comments on We are not living in a simulation - Less Wrong

-9 Post author: dfranke 12 April 2011 01:55AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (211)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: FAWS 12 April 2011 07:33:46PM -2 points [-]

Do you mean, "know enough to tell for sure whether a given complex idea is embodied in any discrete piece of the brain?"

Yes

No, but we know for sure that some must exist which are not, because conceptspace is bigger than thingspace.

Potential, easily accessible concept space, not necessarily actually used concept space. Even granting the brain using some concepts without corresponding discrete anatomy I don't see how they can serve as a replacement in your argument when we can't identify them.

Comment author: dfranke 12 April 2011 07:46:45PM 0 points [-]

The only role that this example-of-an-idea is playing in my argument is as an analogy to illustrate what I mean when I assert that qualia physically exist in the brain without there being such thing as a "qualia cell". You clearly already understand this concept, so is my particular choice of analogy so terribly important that it's necessary to nitpick over this?

Comment author: FAWS 12 April 2011 08:26:43PM -2 points [-]

The very same uncertainty would also apply to qualia (assuming that even is a meaningful concept), only worse because we understand them even less. If we can't answer the question of whether a particular concept is embedded in discrete anatomy, how could we possibly answer that question for qualia when we can't even verify their existence in the first place?