[Serious Phil] What Is Required?
examachine at gmail.com
Fri Aug 17 12:37:47 CDT 2012
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 7:23 PM, SWM <Philscimind at undergroundwiki.org>wrote:
> I think the point I've made, that experience as an occurrence in the
> universe is explainable in a way that does not invoke explanation of how an
> experience seems to the experiencer, is more than sufficient to cover your
> Mary-in-the-Room objections.
PDJ at this point probably doesn't recognize that all of his objections are
dogmatic, they would work iff physicalism were false. :)))) Did anybody
else recognize that? He needs to assume dualism (substance dualism
actually) to make his objections.
Otherwise, I already explained how "red" could be tested with standard
neuroscience experiments. We might need finer electrode devices in the
future to do it in vivo, but in vivo spike recording was made with flies
etc. so there is no reason why it can't be done.
Eray Ozkural, PhD candidate. Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Philscimind