From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima Thu Feb 20 15:20:06 EST 1992
Article 3661 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima
>From: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Functionalist Theory of Qualia
Message-ID: <406@tdatirv.UUCP>
Date: 11 Feb 92 20:57:34 GMT
References: <1992Feb4.160229.20899@cs.yale.edu> <1992Feb4.193653.25027@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Feb5.220638.9673@cs.yale.edu> <1992Feb6.055620.23808@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <jbaxter.697533284@adelphi>
Reply-To: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: Teradata Corp., Irvine
Lines: 62

In article <jbaxter.697533284@adelphi> jbaxter@physics.adelaide.edu.au (Jon Baxter) writes:
|
|I am not a philosopher (at least I'm not paid to be a philosopher), however
|the key issue for me in this "where do qualia come from" debate is whether
|it really is "Logically possible to imagine a universe identical to ours
|in all respects, except that there are no qualia."

Not for me.  Qualia reside in the functioning of the brain, somehow.
An identically functioning brain would experience the same things as ours.

| However, there is one lasting problem with the materialist's
|viewpoint, and that is the problem of wave-function collapse in quantum
|mechanics. 60 odd years after the invention of quantum mechanics, the
|theory that is the basis of all materialism still cannot explain how a
|physical system evolves from a superposition of states into particular
|eigenstates.

Perhaps not, but a recent experiment has shown that a brain is not necessary
for causing a wave-function colapse, just any measuring instrument, even
if it is never looked at (indeed even if it is not producing any observable
output to look at).

This suggests to me that wave-function collapse is a simple physical process
that occurs when a wave packet interacts with certain types of systems.

That is, pure Quantum Mechanics is incomplete (wow - big surprise :-)).

|In my opinion, this "hole" in our knowledge undermines all
|materialistic descriptions, including any such descriptions of brain function.
|In particular it is not true to say that we understand how the brain
|operates from the ground level up: we see brains in definite states, quantum
|mechanics says we shouldn't.

Not according to the above results.  The human brain is just the sort of
'measuring device' that collapses wave functions.

|Arguments about qualia invoking inadequecies in quantum-mechanics may seem
|pretty far-fetched, especially when we view qualia as being supervenient on
|incredibly complex physical processes such as brains exhibit. However I think
|David Chalmers has argued pretty convincingly for the existence of qualia in
|far simpler things than brains, things as simple even as electrons absorbing
|photons.

I remain skeptical here.  (His arguments are good, but I do not think
conclusive).  I tend to take a functional approach - qualia are evolution's
solution to regulating survival related behavior in complex organisms.
That is they exist because a complex animal with them behaves more
appropriately for any given circumstance than one without them - and thus
survives to propagate them.

|In particular, wave function collapse seems to have something to
|do with irreversible change, irreversibility is a function of the entropy
|change in a physical system, and entropy is just another way of saying
|information (in the strict Shannon/Weaver sense).

This certainly seems like a reasonable first approximation - now all you need
is to formalize it mathematically and devise ways of testing it - then
you will be famous for solving this problem.
-- 
---------------
uunet!tdatirv!sarima				(Stanley Friesen)



