You seem to have given exactly the reply that my “EDIT NB”, added before your reply, was designed to forestall.
Can you state that in terms of what you would see looking in from the outside? For example, do you think you would not see life that used phrases such as “the subjective experience of the colour blue”?
I meant I did agree with you, and that externally everything would appear exactly the same. However, from what I think is Mitchell Porter’s point of view, the one thing you would not expect from such a universe is the possibility of being inside it. P-Zombies, I suppose.
Ah, OK! I don’t know whether anyone’s going to try to mount a zombie-based defence of Porter’s position. These are the articles it would need to reply to. M-zombies would be distinct from P-zombies in that Porter believes that physics can account for our non-zombieness, but M-zombies would still write articles asking where subjective experience comes from, even though they don’t have any.
You seem to have given exactly the reply that my “EDIT NB”, added before your reply, was designed to forestall.
Can you state that in terms of what you would see looking in from the outside? For example, do you think you would not see life that used phrases such as “the subjective experience of the colour blue”?
I meant I did agree with you, and that externally everything would appear exactly the same. However, from what I think is Mitchell Porter’s point of view, the one thing you would not expect from such a universe is the possibility of being inside it. P-Zombies, I suppose.
EDIT: Also, sorry for not being clear re your NB.
Ah, OK! I don’t know whether anyone’s going to try to mount a zombie-based defence of Porter’s position. These are the articles it would need to reply to. M-zombies would be distinct from P-zombies in that Porter believes that physics can account for our non-zombieness, but M-zombies would still write articles asking where subjective experience comes from, even though they don’t have any.