From: Mitchell Porter (you_have_some_sort_of_bug@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Mar 16 2001 - 18:09:05 MST
--- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience@pobox.com>
wrote:
> Mitchell Porter wrote:
> >
> > So, start again, with models involving
> > bundles of qualia; these are the monads...
> >
> > Now I don't know how to translate that into
> > Bayesian reasoning. But how much is a solution
> > to the hard problem of qualia worth?
>
> You translate it into Bayesian reasoning by
> explaining how our Universe
> would behave differently if the qualia-monads
> (*cough*philotes*cough*)
> were replaced by simple particles. You perform the
> translation by
> explaining how the subjective qualities of the
> monads make their way into
> large-scale nervous system phenomena such as my
> verbal thoughts and the
> motor actions producing these keystrokes.
But the bare concept of monads-made-of-qualia
is not meant to explain the details of phenomena
(that would be the role of a specific theory
that fleshes out the concept in a particular way),
it's meant to explain how there can be any such
thing as observation of a Universe to begin with.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:36 MDT