Hi Luc Delannoy, I very much appreciate you're participation in the consciousness survey project, and for supporting [http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/85/10 this camp] that represents Edmond Wright's "Narrative, Perception, Language, and Faith" along with myself as a second supporter of this camp, improving it with you... I'm also going to forward a copy of this open letter to Edmond Write, and Stephen Robbins, who has personally contacted me encouraging the creation of a new camp, with references to Edmond's "The case for qualia" and some other works for references. Edmond has done quite a bit to help me and my attempts to understand some of his theories. I went to great effort to get a copy of Narrative, Perception, Language through inter library loan and read it, have also spent time on these other references and discussing these issues with you. I have spent much more time on this camp than any other camp to date. However, despite my efforts, I still fail to fully understand why so many people still seem to consider Edmond a "representationalist", while he himself has expressed to me that this is a miss classification, or that he has abandoned representationalism? I've attempted to find answers to these questions: if not representationalism, then what? Where is redness, and what is it a property of, if not a property of a representation of, or knowledge of something reflecting 650 nm light? But I have failed to find, or gain any kind of good understanding of an answer to this and many other questions about all this. Surely this is mostly due to my apparently different current working hypothesis of consciousness. Like most people, I usually have a very difficult time understanding theories different from the way I think about consciousness. Even if I did achieve a good understanding, me attempting to create a camp alone would surely be a poor one, and misrepresent many things? That I know of, the 3 three of you clearly support these ideas and this amount of consensus tells me there is something very important about this way of thinking about consciousness. We would all desperately love to get a camp started containing a concise description of just what all of you believe, especially what you agree on. Stephen mentioned that the: "representational qualia theory being supported heavily is based upon some fundamental (mis)assumptions about space and time that Bergson exposed 100 years ago." It would be extremely valuable to everyone to have a concise description of what these are, especially if all of you agree with them. If not, how do you differ in your beliefs, and so on? Stephen mentioned that he doesn't yet understand how canonizer.com works, and that is fine, there are ways people can easily contribute with almost no effort. All anyone needs to do is submit a concise statement describing their current working hypothesis to me, with supporting arguments, a problems of competing theories, and so on. The important thing about canonizer.com is it doesn't need to be complete in any way, just something off the top of your head, quick and dirty, to get things started, so others can run with it and improve it from there. Volunteers can take whatever you send to us and get it integrated into the survey data we have to date, all according to all of your approval, of course. Basically the best way to make things work, is you tell us what to add to the survey, possibly how to restructure things, and so on, if it were entirely up to you. Then the volunteers can work to make as much of all that possible as we can so it best represents what you believe, along with what everyone else believes, with as much consensus as possible. Given the 3 of you are already proponents of these ideas, and have already each contacted me about these ideas and references, I bet there is a good chance, with only a little easy off the top of your heads wiki help from any of you, so others can take what you start and run with it, this camp could become a consensus contender as a leading theory to compete with "Representational Qualia Theory" or some subset of that camp (since we all obviously agree on the importance of qualia). I hope at least some of you will give us a few easy minutes with getting this started. It only takes a little, perhaps even just a quick name to get the camp started, so we can get this obviously very well supported and important way of thinking about consciousness concisely and quantitatively represented, so we can see just how many other people also agree with any of this and so on, and so the rest of the world can better know what this way is, in comparison to the currently existing theories. Upwards, Brent Allsop