How do you know the only system that could carry a conversation about the weather and predict the next move of every rat molecule or atom or whatever relevant bit would be one that separated the processes?
It might not have to separate the processes completely I suppose, if there were exact similarities in the computations somewhere. But I meant that if the humanrat started experiencing a composite of qualia from rat and human, like seeing green money and feeling scared of it, then the humanrat cannot be using that to predict the behaviours of either rat or human. Or insofar as it is predicting the behaviours in a “distributed way” it is also experiencing all of the qualia in a “distributed way” and should be able to reintegrate these gaining full knowledge of the qualia.
I have no idea of the “rules of qualia” although it seems like the sort of thing we could potentially obtain “subjective” knowledge about. But I don’t see a real objection to my article emerging here.
There are a bunch of different sets and they have their pros and cons but whatever you do don’t use the 4th Edition rules of Qualia.
The more refining that is done to the concept the simpler it gets and the harder it is to suspend disbelief. It’s as if someone thought it would be possible to try and make rich characters from WoW avatars that are empty shells, as if the essence of a character’s richness could be stripped from complex, caused interactions with the environment. That’s not magic, it’s hand waving. So what if they would otherwise be computationally expensive?
It might not have to separate the processes completely I suppose, if there were exact similarities in the computations somewhere. But I meant that if the humanrat started experiencing a composite of qualia from rat and human, like seeing green money and feeling scared of it, then the humanrat cannot be using that to predict the behaviours of either rat or human. Or insofar as it is predicting the behaviours in a “distributed way” it is also experiencing all of the qualia in a “distributed way” and should be able to reintegrate these gaining full knowledge of the qualia.
I have no idea of the “rules of qualia” although it seems like the sort of thing we could potentially obtain “subjective” knowledge about. But I don’t see a real objection to my article emerging here.
There are a bunch of different sets and they have their pros and cons but whatever you do don’t use the 4th Edition rules of Qualia.
The more refining that is done to the concept the simpler it gets and the harder it is to suspend disbelief. It’s as if someone thought it would be possible to try and make rich characters from WoW avatars that are empty shells, as if the essence of a character’s richness could be stripped from complex, caused interactions with the environment. That’s not magic, it’s hand waving. So what if they would otherwise be computationally expensive?