Eliezer_Yudkowsky comments on The raw-experience dogma: Dissolving the “qualia” problem - Less Wrong

2 Post author: metaphysicist 16 September 2012 07:15PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (340)
Tags: qualia consciousness

Comments (340)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 15 September 2012 03:46:41AM 15 points [-]

The simplest explanation for the universe is that it doesn't exist. It's not popular, because the universe seems to exist. Explanations need to be adeqaute to the facts, not just simple.

Upvoted for this line alone. See also, "If nothing exists, I want to know how the nothing works and why it seems to be so highly ordered."

Comment author: TheOtherDave 15 September 2012 04:31:42AM 3 points [-]

See also Occam's sandblaster

Comment author: metaphysicist 18 September 2012 08:11:30AM 1 point [-]

"If nothing exists, I want to know how the nothing works and why it seems to be so highly ordered."

If qualia are explained by our innate intuitions (or beliefs)—propositional attitudes—then two questions follow about "how it works":

  1. What is the propositional content of the beliefs?

  2. What evolutionary pressures caused their development?

I make some conjectures in another essay.

Comment author: Peterdjones 18 September 2012 08:43:55PM 0 points [-]

Qualia might be beliefs instead of qualia. Matter might be qualia instead of matter.

Comment author: newname 28 September 2012 12:25:36AM -1 points [-]

:. Beliefs might be Matter instead of Beliefs, or put more simply, beliefs may matter.

Comment author: Pentashagon 18 September 2012 06:03:23PM 0 points [-]

Upvoted for this line alone. See also, "If nothing exists, I want to know how the nothing works and why it seems to be so highly ordered."

Or in other words "I think, therefore I want to explore."

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit