Since we don’t actually have physical explanations of qualia, that is itself an intuition.
No, there are (or, at least can be in principle) various good reasons for thinking physicalism is true—it need not rest on mere intuition. And once you’ve assumed that physicalism is true, the above is a consistent, correct conclusion for the thought experiment.
If you think physicalism is false, I would not think the above explanation would feel very satisfying to you—but then, I was talking about what feels satisfying to me.
No, there are (or, at least can be in principle) various good reasons for thinking physicalism is true
We still don’t have a physical explanation of qualia. So it is still a kind of guess
that physicalism, which has been successful in other areas cab be extended to all areas. It’s an intuition based on evidence, but the intended intuition of the Mary story
is based on evidence as well, since we have all had novel experiences which went
beyond their descriptions.
If you think physicalism is false, I would not think the above explanation would feel very satisfying to you
No, there are (or, at least can be in principle) various good reasons for thinking physicalism is true—it need not rest on mere intuition. And once you’ve assumed that physicalism is true, the above is a consistent, correct conclusion for the thought experiment.
If you think physicalism is false, I would not think the above explanation would feel very satisfying to you—but then, I was talking about what feels satisfying to me.
We still don’t have a physical explanation of qualia. So it is still a kind of guess that physicalism, which has been successful in other areas cab be extended to all areas. It’s an intuition based on evidence, but the intended intuition of the Mary story is based on evidence as well, since we have all had novel experiences which went beyond their descriptions.
Can’t I just find it unsatisfying anyway?