From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!chalmers Tue Feb 11 15:25:33 EST 1992
Article 3567 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!chalmers
>From: chalmers@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (David Chalmers)
Subject: Re: Functionalist Theory of Qualia
Message-ID: <1992Feb7.051009.27378@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Keywords: qualia, functionalism
Organization: Indiana University
References: <1992Feb4.193653.25027@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Feb5.220638.9673@cs.yale.edu> <1992Feb6.194356.3126@aisb.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 92 05:10:09 GMT
Lines: 14

In article <1992Feb6.194356.3126@aisb.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:

>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).

For what it's worth, the issue at stake here, i.e. functionalism vs.
property dualism, is more or less completely orthogonal to the
question of whether thermostats (say) have qualia, which I presume
is where your incredulity kicks in.

-- 
Dave Chalmers                            (dave@cogsci.indiana.edu)      
Center for Research on Concepts and Cognition, Indiana University.
"It is not the least charm of a theory that it is refutable."


