structure for 'Nature of Minds'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 6. Inverted Qualia

[one stimulus causing opposite experiences]

8 ideas
There is nothing illogical about inverted qualia [Locke]
     Full Idea: It would not carry any implication of falsehood to our simple ideas if by the different structure of our organs it were so ordered that the same object should produce in several men's minds different ideas at the same time (e.g. the colour of a violet).
     From: John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 2.32.15)
     A reaction: The vital point here is that it would be based on 'different structures'. I personally cannot see any objection to the possibility that someone's qualia might be inverted - by brain surgery. That is a problem for naïve realists, though.
The same object might produce violet in one mind and marigold in another [Locke]
     Full Idea: By the different structure of our organs the same object could produce in several men's minds different ideas, viz. if the idea that a violet produced in one man's mind by his eyes were the same that a marigold produced in another man's.
     From: John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 2.32.15)
     A reaction: This is Locke's original proposal that inverted qualia might be possible, but note that he proposes a physical basis for the inversion, in 'different structures'. Without that, claiming qualia inversion is the same as claiming that zombies are possible.
Inverted qualia and zombies suggest experience isn't just functional [Kim]
     Full Idea: If inverted qualia, or absent qualia (zombies), are possible in functionally equivalent systems, qualia are not capturable by functional definitions.
     From: Jaegwon Kim (Philosophy of Mind [1996], p.114)
     A reaction: The point here (I take it) is that we don't have to go the whole hog of saying the qualia are therefore epiphenomenal, although that is implied. How about a fail-safe situation, where qualia do it for me, and something else does the same for zombies?
Crosswiring would show that pain and its function are separate [Kim, by PG]
     Full Idea: If you crosswire your 'pain box' and your 'itch box', the functionalist says you are in pain if the inputs and outputs are for pain, even though the feeling is of an itch.
     From: report of Jaegwon Kim (Philosophy of Mind [1996], p.115) by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: If functionalists would indeed say this, then the objection seems to me almost conclusive. But they might well say that such simple crosswiring won't work. Itching won't produce pain behaviour - it lacks the correct function.
We can't assume that dispositions will remain normal when qualia have been inverted [Dennett]
     Full Idea: The goal of the experiment was to describe a case in which it was obvious that the qualia would be inverted while the reactive dispositions would be normalized. But the assumption that one could just tell is question-begging.
     From: Daniel C. Dennett (Consciousness Explained [1991], 12.4)
     A reaction: It certainly seems simple and plausible that if we inverted our experience of traffic light colours, no difference in driver behaviour would be seen. However, my example, of a conversation in a gallery of abstract art, seems more problematic.
If colour fits a cone mapping hue, brightness and saturation, rotating the cone could give spectrum inversion [Rey]
     Full Idea: If colour can be modelled as a cone, with points mapped by hue, brightness and saturation, then a rotation could be isomorphic with the hues switched, so we may all experience different hues.
     From: Georges Rey (Contemporary Philosophy of Mind [1997], 11.7.1)
     A reaction: from Levine
With inverted qualia a person's experiences would change, but their beliefs remain the same [Crane]
     Full Idea: The right thing to say about inverted qualia is that the person's experiences are different from other people's, but their beliefs are the same.
     From: Tim Crane (Elements of Mind [2001], 5.44)
     A reaction: Right - which reinforces the idea that all beliefs are the result of judgement, and none come directly from perception.
It seems possible to invert qualia [Chalmers]
     Full Idea: It seems entirely coherent that experiences could be inverted while physical structure is duplicated exactly.
     From: David J.Chalmers (The Conscious Mind [1996], 2.3.1.2)
     A reaction: Strange how what seems 'entirely coherent' to a leading philosopher strikes me as totally incoherent. I would have thought it was only coherent to a dualist. I don't believe God makes the physics on Thursday, and adds experiences on Friday.