On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Alberto G.Corona <[email protected]> wrote: > > Therefore I think that I answer your question: it´s not only > information; It´s about a certain kind of information and their own > processor. The exact nature of this processor that permits qualia is > not known; that’s true, and it´s good from my point of view, because, > for one side, the unknown is stimulating and for the other, > reductionist explanations for everything, like the mine above, are a > bit frustrating. >
Given that we don't have an understanding of the subjective process by which we experience the world, I think we should be skeptical about the nature of WHAT we experience. All that I can really conclude is that my experience of reality is one of the set of all possible experiences. But I'm reasonably convinced that our experience of reality is all there is to reality. All possible experiencers are actual to themselves. If you accept that a computer simulation of a human brain is theoretically possible (which I think you should given your functionalist views), and you then accept that such a simulation would be conscious in the same way as a real human is conscious, and then you start pondering WHY that would be, I think my point above is a (the?) logical conclusion. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
