Brent_Allsop replied 11 years ago (Jul 22nd 2012, 3:54:45 am)
In your [http://canonizer.com/thread.asp/88/1/32/202#202 other post] you said you are working on the theory that a quale is "an electromagnetic phenomenon". To me, this is a subset of Material Property Dualism. If what you say is validated by science, it would be the electromagnetic phenomenon that is the physical stuff or material, that has the redness quale - and without that right "electromagnetic phenomenon" no quale. Also, you must admit that this same 'electromagnetic phenomenon' going on outside of your brain, with no memory, or intentional system, or anything present with it, the same "electomagnetic phenomenon" would still always have the same quality, whether inside the brain or not, would it not?
And certainly you must agree that our scientific instruments would be blind to the quality, because such qualities suffer from the quale interpretation problem. All our abstracted senses can tell us of this 'electromagnetic phenomenon' NCC in our brain, is abstracted information of the causal behavior - something different - entirely - than it's true phenomenal nature we can experience when it is our brain.
And you seem to agree that we will be able to discover these qualities of various different types of such 'electromagnetic phenomenon' despite this quale interpretation problem? And if so, would you think there is some better way to refer to achieving, and knowing what they are like, than 'effing the ineffable'?
'effing the ineffable' is just one doctrine of RQT. Currently, everyone in the comp unanimously supports it - and it's been in the camp for some time. All I did was add two additional paragraphs to support the idea against a particular attack. If someone did show up that believe in everything in RQT, but effing of the ineffable, like many other doctrines of the past that were once part of RQT, we'd just push this particular doctrine to a sub camp of RQT.
I don't know how you got I was saying a 'zero point idea is compatible with RQT', I was pointing out how naive and mistaken any "consciousness is a zero point idea" is. But, no worries, I rewrote those two paragraphs without that. Let me know if that is not any better.