More on Zombies
One either supports the idea that what we think and say comes from the activity of the brain, or one has to believe in some kind of magic. It seems pretty to me clear (something that I agree could be disputed) that sometime in the future we will either be able to follow the activity of the brain in enough detail, or we will have set up some kind of accurate brain simulation that we will be able to follow through in a deterministic way the activities of brain cells that correlate with certain thoughts and then send signals to the mouth so that we say "I am imagining red". We will have a complete causal description of why those words are spoken. So where does subjectivity come in? What are 'qualia' - the 'qualities of experience'. I strongly believe that we imagine more is going on that there really is. After all, when we think we are having a subjective experience, this is neural activity. It would be possible to look at that hypothetical brain model and say "look... it is thinking about having a subjective experience", or "it is pondering about the strangeness of qualia". But, there is no causal link needed between some hypothetical extra dualist aspect of our minds and the neurons which is necessary for us to think about qualia, unless there are some extra laws of physics. But even if there were extra laws of physics, how would they help explain subjective experience?
The real problem for dualism is the interaction between brain cells and the other aspect of mind. If brain cells activity alone can result in statements about subjective experience, then there is no need for feedback from that other aspect, and if that other aspect has experiences based on brain cell activity, then there must be some link between than activity and it, but what could it be? There is in the brain nothing but chemistry and electrochemistry.
This is why I reject the real existence of qualia. Just because we think we are experiencing certain things, does not mean that we are. We aren't experts about our own brains, let alone our minds. I support the Buddhist idea of anatta - no self.
The real problem for dualism is the interaction between brain cells and the other aspect of mind. If brain cells activity alone can result in statements about subjective experience, then there is no need for feedback from that other aspect, and if that other aspect has experiences based on brain cell activity, then there must be some link between than activity and it, but what could it be? There is in the brain nothing but chemistry and electrochemistry.
This is why I reject the real existence of qualia. Just because we think we are experiencing certain things, does not mean that we are. We aren't experts about our own brains, let alone our minds. I support the Buddhist idea of anatta - no self.
Re: More on Zombies
In the prequel to this, you said how you bought into dualism since you were a kid.
I must have been a fucked up kid, all these things that seemed to intuitive to so many other people weren't to me.
Evolution wasn't counter-intuitive, dualism wasn't intuitive, what, did I have my brain put in backwards?
Didn't occur to me that my thoughts had to be a separate thing from my body at all.
Even after having the idea of spirits explained to me by my (at the time, Christian) mother.
Didn't take much to sort out that other people were other people, and had thoughts and feelings like me, and yet no ghost was hovering around them.
Or that there was little to no difference between us and animals, and therefore that a squashed bug equaled a dead animal, equaled a dead person.
And nothing magic happened when you squish a bug, so...
Which goes back to my story about the dead squirrel on my blog.
How much nature did you grow up around?
Maybe that's the key.
Did you grow up around woods full of critters?
Have a lot of pets?
I must have been a fucked up kid, all these things that seemed to intuitive to so many other people weren't to me.
Evolution wasn't counter-intuitive, dualism wasn't intuitive, what, did I have my brain put in backwards?
Didn't occur to me that my thoughts had to be a separate thing from my body at all.
Even after having the idea of spirits explained to me by my (at the time, Christian) mother.
Didn't take much to sort out that other people were other people, and had thoughts and feelings like me, and yet no ghost was hovering around them.
Or that there was little to no difference between us and animals, and therefore that a squashed bug equaled a dead animal, equaled a dead person.
And nothing magic happened when you squish a bug, so...
Which goes back to my story about the dead squirrel on my blog.
How much nature did you grow up around?
Maybe that's the key.
Did you grow up around woods full of critters?
Have a lot of pets?
Re: More on Zombies
It wasn't like that at all. At certain stages in the development of a child's brain, new areas start working. I have heard reports of what this feels like from other people. At age 9 I woke up one morning and it was like I was suddenly living life in 3D and there were all these colours around me. It was like I had not really been "me" before. This is apparently something to do with the development of the fibres of the frontal lobes. Perhaps it is more sudden in some people, but for me it was a shock.
Re: More on Zombies
<em>"If brain cells activity alone can result in statements about subjective experience, then there is no need for feedback from that other aspect, and if that other aspect has experiences based on brain cell activity, then there must be some link between than activity and it, but what could it be?"</em>
Yes, what could it be?
I think a computer CPU, with integrated RAM and a firmware operating system, is a good analogy.
In the materialist view, the entire "self" is exclusively contained on that one chip. If a part of that chip fails, say part of the RAM becomes corrupted, it's like suffering from Alzheimer's. That part of the self can never be restored; it is forever lost.
In the dualist view, the chip is a transceiver and projector of the non-material self, which is transmitted over the ether(eal)net. If part of the chip fails, the transmission and reception of information between the hardware body and the self becomes garbled, but the "true self" is still intact on a server somewhere. Problems: we've never been able to find a method of transmission between the body and the soul, and no one has ever been able to provide good evidence for the existence of the heavenly server farm.
- Steelman
Yes, what could it be?
I think a computer CPU, with integrated RAM and a firmware operating system, is a good analogy.
In the materialist view, the entire "self" is exclusively contained on that one chip. If a part of that chip fails, say part of the RAM becomes corrupted, it's like suffering from Alzheimer's. That part of the self can never be restored; it is forever lost.
In the dualist view, the chip is a transceiver and projector of the non-material self, which is transmitted over the ether(eal)net. If part of the chip fails, the transmission and reception of information between the hardware body and the self becomes garbled, but the "true self" is still intact on a server somewhere. Problems: we've never been able to find a method of transmission between the body and the soul, and no one has ever been able to provide good evidence for the existence of the heavenly server farm.
- Steelman