[Serious Phil] Ascribing Predicates vs Detecting Properties

[Peter D]

--- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "walto" <Philscimind at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> --- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "Peter D" <Philscimind@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "walto" <Philscimind@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Polanik's argument here is passing strange.  Nobody cares (or at least nothing of philosophical importance hinges on) exactly how long after-images last.  Qualia have traditionally been thought to be ineffable, short-lived, qualities of experience.
> > 
> > Well, not really, since C.I Lewis doesn't mention transcience it
> > isn't a tradition that goes all the way back. And it's  possible
> > to find examples of long-lasting sensory qualities such as 
> > tinnitus and chronic pain.
> > 
> > >  We can't even get from Shecky whether he takes them to be qualities of experience at all.  Sometimes they ARE experiences, hence must be events of some kind.  I don't know if he agrees with others here that trees are qualia (or "quales").  Thus one may "have a quale" as one may "have a cow" in two ways.
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure what the point is supposed to be of all this mystery.  If one insists that, contrary to philosophical tradition, qualia are NOT ineffable, transient, qualities of experience, but that they exist nevertheless, one will be expected to tell us what the hell they are. When one points to this paradigm pink* ring, is pink* the quale? (making it a universal, if other things can have the same color) or is the pink* ring the quale (making it a particular) or is the experience of the pink ring the quale (making it an event).  
> > > 
> > > I don't think it matters too much whether "transient" is vague or ambiguous or we precisify it.  Joe won't even tell us whether he believes "lasting less than one minute" names a property.  He, like others of his species, thrives on mystery.
> > > 
> > > W
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Philscimind mailing list
> > Philscimind@
> >
> 
> 
> Tinnitus?!  I thought that was a condition.  

A condition of hearing a sound , with a sensory quality, like
all perceived sounds. 

>I guess we can add those to properties, particulars and events.  Whatever these thingies are, they sure do get around!  
> 
> As for Lewis and transience, that's not my recollection, but I can't check right now.  I'm on the road in the middle of Western Mass. Soaking up heat qualies as I type this on a b-berry 'torch'. 
> 
> W 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Philscimind mailing list
> Philscimind at ...
>