Kaj_Sotala comments on Mental Clarity; or How to Read Reality Accurately - Less Wrong

-10 Post author: Hicquodiam 12 April 2012 06:18AM

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

Comments (24)

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

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 14 April 2012 08:20:35AM 0 points [-]

I can think about a thing, and then I can think about thinking about the thing, and then I can think about doing that, and so on.

But that's not an actual infinite regress - you can go up however many levels you like, but it's still a finite number.

It seems like the problem can be just as easily solved by saying that the qualia of observing a qualia is the qualia itself. Why should they need to be separate? You experience the sensation of redness, and the experience of experiencing that sensation of redness is precisely the experience of the sensation of redness.

I'm not sure how your "the qualia of observing a qualia is the qualia itself" is different from my "a qualia observes itself".

Comment author: Maelin 16 April 2012 04:32:27AM 0 points [-]

I'm not sure how your "the qualia of observing a qualia is the qualia itself" is different from my "a qualia observes itself".

The difference, I think, is that there is an observer having the qualia, rather than just a qualia happening by itself without a qualia-haver to have it.

This is starting to feel very nebulous and free-floaty. I feel like the words we are using are not locking on very strongly to robust concepts in my mind. It may not be a productive line of discussion.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 16 April 2012 08:01:05AM *  0 points [-]

This is starting to feel very nebulous and free-floaty. I feel like the words we are using are not locking on very strongly to robust concepts in my mind. It may not be a productive line of discussion.

Agreed - I'm not even sure whether we actually disagree or are just using different terminology.