= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
HoverHell comments on One last roll of the dice - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (107)
Mostly irrelevant to the OP, a question: how implausible do you see a claim that dualism is false (there's nothing irreducible in material models of our minds) and (at the same time) qualia (or phenomena as in constructs from qualia) are ontologically basic? (and, ergo, materialism i.e. material model is not ontologically basic).
(for few references, there are opposing (conflicting) hypotheses of “(strong) solipsism”, “materialism” and “agnostic solipsism”, and the aforementioned claim is a conclusion of the latter one.)
EDIT: If this (and nearby) is a post with red-flag keywords of “downvote it” then there's probably not overcomplicated post with green-flag words that will be upvoted without second though :)
More seriously: it is helpful to state why are you downvoting unless you are significantly certain that the poster is intentionally being obnoxious or apparently ignores such comments.
I don't know. Probably very low, certainly less than 1%.
Hm, I realize that I might mean something different by “ontologically basic” from others.
Then, s/ontologic/empistemologic/g , i.e. “how implausible do you see a claim that dualism is false (…) and qualia (…) are epistemologically basic?”
Asserting that qualia are ontologically basic appears to be assuming that an aspect of mind is ontologically basic, i.e. dualism. So it's only not having done the logical chain myself that would let me set a a probability (a statement of my uncertainty) on it at all, rather than just saying "contradiction".
There's also a (not really low) possibility that you are misinterpreting the question (i.e. understanding it in a way different from intended).
Also (but not importantly) there's a possibility that there's no such thing as “matter” and therefore dualism is false (and, as a particular case of that — “(strong) solipsism” — qualia are ontologically basic)..
Also, a question in the adjacent thread (http://lesswrong.com/lw/9rb/one_last_roll_of_the_dice/5tox), if you don't mind answering.