Do Qualia Exist?: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » General Philosophy » Do Qualia Exist? » Do Qualia Exist?

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

Do Qualia Exist?

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 07/19/09 - 06:45 PM: Subject: Does Qualia Exist	#1
There is a lot of thought being done regarding what Qualia is, how it comes about and the implications of such a solution. I was wondering if there is any way to prove it actually exists. I would like to call a software analogy on this one. I could write a computer program that contains a virtual world, and virtual agents. I could even give these agents a 'self', an illusionary first person perspective of their environment (obviously much simpler then our rich environment and experience), and even make them ask questions like "why?". Does this not show us that it is quite possible that Qualia is an illusion? A trick conjured up by the brain. In my mind, given what we know in neuroscience, doesn't this sound like the more probable explanation of qualia? That there is no hard problem. It is still important to understand how the illusion comes about, but hopefully you get the idea. I understand that this is not a new idea, but I do not understand why it not the prominent idea. I would just like to know what other people on PF have to say. Any good arguments for qualias existence?
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

unenlightened
everything is...

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Location: Wales

Total Topics: 36
Total Posts: 3286

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 07/19/09 - 07:32 PM:	#2
Everything I know about neuroscience, I got from various qualia, so from my point of view, you are trying to explain an illusion by means of its contents. Which doesn't satisfy, somehow. Since I only have any idea that anything at all exists through having some experience of it, I am not in a position to even question the existence of experiences; the contents of experiences can be real or illusory, but I cannot give a meaning to the idea that experiences are an illusion without some real experiences to contrast them with. Even my illusions are qualia - I would say 'real qualia' but real/unreal doesn't apply in this context. I explain my experiences in terms of a world that I call real - to then say that the world is real but my experiences are not is frankly potty.
...most of our actions are the result of the past, or according to a future ideal. That's not action, that is just conformity. J Krishnamurti "Philosophy, to the Philistine, is an evolutionary process, watched over by some sort of brisk dynamic Providence, and culminating in the supreme insight of modern thought." John Cowper Powys

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 07/19/09 - 08:43 PM:	#3
unenlightened wrote: Everything I know about neuroscience, I got from various qualia, so from my point of view, you are trying to explain an illusion by means of its contents. Which doesn't satisfy, somehow. Since I only have any idea that anything at all exists through having some experience of it, I am not in a position to even question the existence of experiences; the contents of experiences can be real or illusory, but I cannot give a meaning to the idea that experiences are an illusion without some real experiences to contrast them with. Even my illusions are qualia - I would say 'real qualia' but real/unreal doesn't apply in this context. I explain my experiences in terms of a world that I call real - to then say that the world is real but my experiences are not is frankly potty. I was not arguing that experience is real or not, I was arguing that qualia is not real. There is a wavelength of light we call red, but the redness of red is just an illusion. How do you address the software analogy above?
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

unenlightened
everything is...

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Location: Wales

Total Topics: 36
Total Posts: 3286

Posted 07/19/09 - 09:14 PM:	#4
How do you know there is a 'wavelength'? The qualia of 'measuring a wavelength' are certainly no less illusory than 'the redness of red'. Experiences are qualia; qualia are experiences. The experience of seeing red things is the qualia of red. There is a wavelength of light that we see as red. How can it be an illusion that we see it how we see it? How can the wavelength be real, but the seeing unreal? As to your analogy. I don't think you could do it, but if you could, there would be virtual beings in a virtual world having virtual experiences - it would all be 'real to them', and you would be god of the virtual world.
...most of our actions are the result of the past, or according to a future ideal. That's not action, that is just conformity. J Krishnamurti "Philosophy, to the Philistine, is an evolutionary process, watched over by some sort of brisk dynamic Providence, and culminating in the supreme insight of modern thought." John Cowper Powys

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 07/19/09 - 09:29 PM:	#5
Do I really have to explain the difference between a wavelength of light and the 'redness of red'? I think you have missed the point. I am saying that qualia is as real as say microsoft windows, or any running software, i.e. qualia is a virtual representation of reality.
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

jsidelko
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 08, 2009

Total Topics: 30
Total Posts: 268

Posted 07/19/09 - 10:01 PM:	#6
Qualia exists as an indexical which is unique to every person having the experience. It is like software that varies with the subtle differences among each person's 'operating system'.
thanatos

unenlightened
everything is...

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Location: Wales

Total Topics: 36
Total Posts: 3286

Posted 07/19/09 - 10:20 PM:	#7
mway wrote: Do I really have to explain the difference between a wavelength of light and the 'redness of red'? I think you have missed the point. I am saying that qualia is as real as say microsoft windows, or any running software, i.e. qualia is a virtual representation of reality. I think you are missing the point. How the devil do you, (or any virtual being/software) know any damn thing about reality? All you've got is your qualia.
...most of our actions are the result of the past, or according to a future ideal. That's not action, that is just conformity. J Krishnamurti "Philosophy, to the Philistine, is an evolutionary process, watched over by some sort of brisk dynamic Providence, and culminating in the supreme insight of modern thought." John Cowper Powys

bert1
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 11, 2007
Location: Morecambe, UK

Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 238

Posted 07/19/09 - 10:31 PM:	#8
What Unenlightened said. Calling 'qualia' illusory simply indicates a misunderstanding of the concept. Illusions [i]are[i/] qualia, just ones that don't lead you into productive relationship with reality. The trouble with giving the subjective aspect of experience a name like 'qualia' is that it tends to objectify it. All that qualia are are the subjective aspects of experience. I generally think the term 'qualia' quite unhelpful, and it's best just to talk about phenomenal experience, or experience, or subjective experience.
"Like a ungroomed dog in which the desired look is it’s long hair but it has been so unattended to, that combing is impractical, and it might be better if the hair was cut and attended to as it grows back." d_martin

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 07/19/09 - 10:36 PM:	#9
Yes yes, All I have is Qualia, nothing can be certain, blah blah blah (this isn't a solipsism thread). I will rephrase the OP. Upon talking to many people, I find the common belief to be that Qualia exists, usually as some sort of dualistic substance that everyone is trying to understand. I would like to know why this seems to be of common acceptance when there is no logical proof, and Occam's points strongly in the direction of a software analogue illusion?
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

unenlightened
everything is...

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Location: Wales

Total Topics: 36
Total Posts: 3286

Posted 07/19/09 - 10:55 PM:	#10
I give up. I will pretend to agree that you don't 'really' exist.
...most of our actions are the result of the past, or according to a future ideal. That's not action, that is just conformity. J Krishnamurti "Philosophy, to the Philistine, is an evolutionary process, watched over by some sort of brisk dynamic Providence, and culminating in the supreme insight of modern thought." John Cowper Powys

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.