= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FAWS comments on The raw-experience dogma: Dissolving the “qualia” problem - 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 (340)
Materialism predicts that algorithms have an "inside"?
As a further note, I'll have to say that if all the blue and if the red in my visual experience were switched around, my hunch tells me that I'd be experiencing something different; not just in the sense of different memory associations but that the visual experience itself would be different. It would not just be that "red" is associated with hot, and that "blue" is associated with cold... The qualia of the visual experience itself would be different.
That thought experiment doesn't make much sense. If the experiences were somehow switched, but everything else kept the same (i .e all your memories and associations of red are still connected to each other and everything else in the same way) you wouldn't notice the difference; everything would still match your memories exactly. If there even is such a thing as raw qualia there is no reason to suppose they are stable from one moment to the other; as long as the correct network of associations is triggered there is no evolutionary advantage either way.