Picture of the author
Topic :
Representational Functionalism = Diet Qualia?
Thread Created at Jun 3rd 2012, 6:48:21 pm | Started by rolfk
Number of Post in this thread: 2
Please Sign In to comment on this Thread
rolfk replied 12 years ago (Jun 4th 2012, 1:11:44 am)
The Frankish paper on diet qualia is available at no cost on his website under Articles.
Brent_Allsop replied 12 years ago (Jun 3rd 2012, 6:48:21 pm)
Theoreticians, I've been researching some of Keith Frankish's work on this 'seeming' issue. He has lots of great information about stuff which he says is a 'common move in literature', and seems to be the same move James and Mike are attempting, when they talk about quale. One of his papers was entitled: [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810011001176 Quining diet qualia], in which he borrows the 'quining qualia' term from Dennett. Unfortunately, you have to pay to get that paper, but he has a great guest blog post [http://schwitzsplinters.blogspot.com/2007/07/qualia-real-thing-by-guest-blogger.html here] on this. He refers to 'clasic qualia' as being 'ineffable, intrinsic, and private', which I seem to stress are important (although I prefer 'fundamental' to 'intrinsic'), which Mike and James seem to not consider are properties of what they think of as qualia? Anyway, I wondered if Mike and James would agree that their definition of 'qualia is this same 'diet' definition that Frankish talks about? It appears to me that Keith is a true qualophobe, and thinks we also don't have 'diet' qualia. So, perhaps, we'll need to come up with the following camp structure to include these types of people? * Representationalism * Qualophiles * Property Dualism / Classic Qualia * Diet Qualia / Representational Functionalism * Qualophobes.