Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Tanasije_Gjorgoski comments on Zombies: The Movie - Less Wrong

72 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 20 April 2008 05:53AM

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

Comments (74)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Tanasije_Gjorgoski 20 April 2008 02:27:07PM 0 points [-]

Hi Q,

Science doesn't, and naturalism doesn't (commit to the claim that one can a priori get from physical facts to the facts about consciousness). But that is THE commitment of physicalism. Physicalism is not equal to science. It is just yet another metaphysical position. Physicalist's position is usually defined that *metaphysically there is no difference without metaphysical difference*. And the metaphysical necessity is a priori necessity. (Some try to say that physicalism doesn't need to claim a priori necessity, but only Kripkean a posteriori necessity, but that is , seems to me, really just hiding the commitment of a priori deduction. I could say more on this, if needed).

So, when person presents zombie argument, he doesn't give argument against science, nor physics, but against this metaphysical commitment of physicalism (defined as "no difference without physical difference). I wonder if lot of negative reactions to the zombie argument in this series of post is mixing up the naturalistic/scientific view on the world with the claims of physicalism. (Of course there is also the silly consequences of the epiphenomenalism, but as I said, we can take that as a reductio.)