From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!haven.umd.edu!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aisb!jeff Tue Feb 11 15:25:24 EST 1992
Article 3551 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!haven.umd.edu!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aisb!jeff
>From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Functionalist Theory of Qualia
Keywords: qualia, functionalism
Message-ID: <1992Feb6.194356.3126@aisb.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 6 Feb 92 19:43:56 GMT
References: <1992Feb4.160229.20899@cs.yale.edu> <1992Feb4.193653.25027@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Feb5.220638.9673@cs.yale.edu>
Sender: news@aisb.ed.ac.uk (Network News Administrator)
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 9

In article <1992Feb5.220638.9673@cs.yale.edu> mcdermott-drew@CS.YALE.EDU (Drew McDermott) writes:
>[The dogmatic tone of the foregoing is due to the task at hand, which
>is explaining exactly what the computationalist theory of qualia *is.*
>I acknowledge that most people find the theory incredible, but at
>least there ought to be such a theory on the table for discussion, or
>computationalism has left a big gap.]

For what it's worth, I find your version of it much less incredible
than Dave Chalmers's (assuming that the two of you aren't agreeing).


