more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 2582

[filed under theme 15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 5. Qualia / c. Explaining qualia ]

Full Idea

NO physical mechanism seems very intuitively plausible as a seat of qualia, least of all a brain.

Gist of Idea

A brain looks no more likely than anything else to cause qualia

Source

Ned Block (Troubles with Functionalism [1978], p. 78)

Book Ref

'The Philosophy of Mind', ed/tr. Beakley,B /Ludlow P [MIT 1992], p.78


A Reaction

I'm not sure about "least of all", given the mind-boggling complexity of the brain's connections. Certainly, though, nothing in either folk physics or academic physics suggests that any physical object is likely to be aware of anything.


The 13 ideas with the same theme [theories that might explain qualia]:

The way things look is a relational matter, not an intrinsic matter [Harman]
"Qualia" can be replaced by complex dispositional brain states [Dennett]
Obviously there can't be a functional anaylsis of qualia if they are defined by intrinsic properties [Dennett]
A brain looks no more likely than anything else to cause qualia [Block]
It is question-begging to assume that qualia are totally simple, hence irreducible [Churchlands]
The qualia Hard Problem is easy, in comparison with the co-ordination of mental states [Churchlands]
Are qualia irrelevant to explaining the mind? [Rey]
Pain is composed of urges, desires, impulses etc, at different levels of abstraction [Lycan]
The right 'level' for qualia is uncertain, though top (behaviourism) and bottom (particles) are false [Lycan]
Weak intentionalism says qualia are extra properties; strong intentionalism says they are intentional [Crane]
If qualia supervene on intentional states, then intentional states are explanatorily fundamental [Jacquette]
Qualia are not extra appendages, but intrinsic ingredients of material states and processes [Heil]
The sensation of red is a point in neural space created by dimensions of neuronal activity [Edelman/Tononi]