In Conversation: W. V. Quine - Block Panel - Section 2

[olllHashedFetish]

The inquisitor looks like he's wearing a disguise kit.

[polymath7]

@ 7:37

I.

"Well, it's hard to think of what such an explanation would consist in..."

"What could be added is an explanation for the feeling itself..."

The host comes nowhere near pinning down what explanandum remains to be addressed, but I propose it is this: the implicit supposition that some physical systems experience qualiative states, and some (again, we suppose) do not.

If it is the case that qualia are an emergent property, and arise only when matter and energy are arranged...

[polymath7]

II.

...in certain patterns, it is entirely reasonable to ask by what methodology we know which patterns result in systems that are conscious and which kindle no spark of qualitive experience at all not -or indeed even *if *we know this.

Never mind for the moment describing or ascertaining the *exact* "something it is like" to be a given system, just consider for the moment the criteria by which you decide whether and how you know a system experiences anything at all. I have yet to see...

[polymath7]

III.

...any proposed solution to this problem -or dismissal of it- that is not utterly hollowly arbitrary and and tautological.

Let's say I have a sentient computer (and I'll remark in passing that there simply *are no* arguments against strong AI that cannot be completely dismissed with a wave of the hand) that is presently shut off and takes several minutes to boot; or let's say even for the sake of (thought) experiment I have it set up so that subsystems come in line sequentially and...

[polymath7]

IV.

...only gradually (let's say over the course of ten minutes) become integrated computationally) to put it simply, imagine HAL being shut down in reverse).

If eliminative materialism is correct, there must necessarily be an *exact* point in time at which the computer absolutely abruptly springs into some sort of qualiative state -however faint- from an immediately preceding state of complete oblivion. I find this extraordinarily odd, but then the corollary alternative, pansychism, seems...

[polymath7]

V.

...at least equally odd.

This comment is running into five parts and exceeding my desire to express it(who's reading it anyway) but, to be complete... I would strenuously aver that any satisfactory theory of consciousness must offer an epistemology that at least attempts to decide, by some means other than just subjective report (George is in pain because he says so) which systems are conscious, and why.

This sounds absurdly impossible, but I think might I know how it could be done.

[a11mind]

@polymath7 "who's reading it anyway":

.

The man who is devoted and not attached to the fruit of his actions obtains tranquillity; whilst he who through desire has attachment for the fruit of action is bound down thereby.

[a11mind]

@polymath7 "equally odd" equals "equally weird"

and yet is there no known weird odd number...

isn't that also "equally odd"?

As there are oxymorons, there also are little nuts

so hard to let look even our best minds like nuts (or morons).

As there are the knowns and the known unknowns there are also the unknowns we will never know to un-un-know. (And also are there nuts (of the moronic kind) that can drive one nuts!)

[presentlyabsent]

@polymath7 "who's reading it anyway":

i did, but i skimmed in such a fleeting way of manner

as to let appear it an altogether incoherent babble

of mindlessly bubbling balbutations ;-)

(such has been done to slighten and diminish you!)

((the (mainly French) onomatopoeticon "balbutation"

was put in to best you on your one field of forte))

[presentlyabsent]

@polymath7 "the field of struggle has been broadened"

to avert your (seemingly) omnipotent "remove" device!

[Gippeyy]

If Quine weren't so old, I would think he was drunk or something... and Ned Block's moustache cracks me up.

But anyway, it's great to see this stuff available to the public!

[polymath7]

@Gippeyy Well, yeah, I suppose it must admitted Quine's speaking voice is far less sonorous than his prose, which is exquisite and absolutely seamless.

[KontrolVoltage]

Thank you so much.

[rootberg]

yea, I would also like to thank you. Great upload.

[Guaguanco11]

That would make him about 86 here.

[flame0430]

Indeed. I hope I'll be such a beast at 86.

[isselman2000]

@flame0430 What does he say here that's so beastly?

[Guaguanco11]

Is this early eighties?

[flame0430]

1994 I think.

[PaulRenwick]

Yeah, truly, thank you for uploading all of these videos, your channel is fantastic.

[DrDeist]

@PaulRenwick : Best channel on Youtube. Nobel Youtube Prize for flame0430!

[mavaddat]

Thanks for posting these, flame0430! You rock.

[flame0430]

Glad to be of service!

[polymath7]

@mavaddat

Indeed.

This is precisely why Youtube beats television all to hell.

[natedaug1]

@mavaddat Yeah good job, flame0430.