Re: Qualia Question



JPL Verhey wrote:
> "1Z" <peterdjones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1119440164.476827.268620@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > HMS Beagle wrote:
> >
> >> Qualia is something different, and this is worth mentioning here
> >> since
> >> it was qualia that started this thread. Qualia simply means you
> >> have
> >> a feeling of what "its like" to be you.
> >
> > No, qualia covers any kind of "what it is like", they are not tied
> > to self image.
> >
> >> This has obvious survival
> >> advantage to ancient humans in roaming tribes, but it may very well
> >> go
> >> back farther to some primitive mechanism of dominance and submission
> >> like we see in gorillas. The gorilla that "feels comfortable" (in
> >> the qualia sense) of being Alpha male will be take his rank place as
> >> alpha male, while those males who dont "feel comfortable" with being
> >> alpha male will not challenge his dominance.
> >
> > Explaining why somthing is , is not explaining what that thing is.
> >
> > The tricky point is that qualia are not communicable in the way
> > that the neural activity underpinning them is.
>
> But what is it like to observe neural actvity?

>>From the inside, or from the outside ?

> Communicating neural
> activity is commmunicating experience as any other quale.

If you stick rigidly to the idea tha qualia just ARE neural activity,
I suppose that would follow. OTOH, the evident difference between talk
in terms of neurons , and talk in terms of feelings and sensations
would seem to be a counterexample to an assumption of simple identity.

.