Eliminating Qualia

[Subsymbolic]

A cello and all of the rest of the physical world involved in the music are, indeed, the music.

No. The cello is the instrument.

The music is something that arises from an interaction between the instrument and the world.

It is a distinct creation.

It is neither the cello or the world. It is an organized "entity" in the world.

And you are telling this to an externalist? Mind you, even you baulk at using the word entity I see. So is it an entity or not? or is it just movement of stuff - you are down to stuff/movement of stuff dualism.

It's a pity you haven't read Dennett's 'Real Patterns'.

http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/images/per...2012/FP2012_readings/Dennett_RealPatterns.pdf

At least Ruby will enjoy it...

 

[untermensche]

Once again you have no argument.

Music is an experience. It most certainly is not a wooden instrument.

Without something experiencing it there is no music.

 

[Subsymbolic]

Once again you have no argument.

Music is an experience. It most certainly is not a wooden instrument.

Without something experiencing it there is no music.

Brilliant - we've reached Berkelean idealism. Now don't forget the Berklean solution: the reason that the world changes when no one is experiencing it is because God is listening. So for WAB, here's a poem:

There was a young man who said "God
Must find it exceedingly odd
To think that the tree
Should continue to be
When there's no one about in the quad."

Reply:

"Dear Sir: Your astonishment's odd;
I am always about in the quad.
And that's why the tree
Will continue to be
Since observed by, Yours faithfully, God."

 

[untermensche]

Again, no argument of any kind.

Music is something experienced. Sound is an experience.

It is not something out in the world.

 

[Subsymbolic]

Again, no argument of any kind.

Music is something experienced. Sound is an experience.

It is not something out in the world.

There's a profound difference between argument you don't recognise or understand and no argument. But, I tell you what, here's your favourite refrain - prove to me, objectively, that anyone ever experiences.

Because I can prove objectively and without recourse to brains that music exists independently of brains:

http://evolver.fm/2012/10/10/top-5-apps-for-identifying-songs/

Explain how these work if there's no music in the world independent of experience...

Cue equivocation in 3...2...1...

 

[untermensche]

Music is just sounds.

Sounds are experienced in minds.

They do not exist anywhere else or as anything besides an experience.

 

[Subsymbolic]

Music is just sounds.

Sounds are experienced in minds.

They do not exist anywhere else or as anything besides an experience.

And the objective proof that music is experienced in minds? You seem to have missed that proof. Over and over and over again. While hypocritically expecting that standard from everyone else.

Oh, and your argument for why precisely software can accurately identify a song from the hummed tune? Does my iphone have a soul too?

The worst thing about all this is it's boring.

 

[Juma]

Again, no argument of any kind.

Music is something experienced. Sound is an experience.

It is not something out in the world.

There's a profound difference between argument you don't recognise or understand and no argument. But, I tell you what, here's your favourite refrain - prove to me, objectively, that anyone ever experiences.

Because I can prove objectively and without recourse to brains that music exists independently of brains:

http://evolver.fm/2012/10/10/top-5-apps-for-identifying-songs/

Explain how these work if there's no music in the world independent of experience...

Cue equivocation in 3...2...1...

Easy:
Because we humans build tools that mimic how we experience music.

 

[untermensche]

Music is just sounds.

Sounds are experienced in minds.

They do not exist anywhere else or as anything besides an experience.

And the objective proof that music is experienced in minds?

We are talking about it.

You don't understand the difference between a stimulus that gets a brain to create a sound and the experience of sound itself.

Sound is an experience.

Something that is only known subjectively. There is not one objective fact known about an experience. How it is created is unknown and what it is experienced by is unknown.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Declaration makes it true.

 

[untermensche]

Are you saying a sound is not an experience?

 

[WAB]

Koy,

I am deeply sorry for my snarky post. I am sick and can get very defensive, as you can see.


Sub,

I'll check out this Holist. But I doubt he can be as devilishly charming as my boy Johnny. Here are my 38 mostly instrumental tracks on Soundcloud:

https://soundcloud.com/william-a-baurle

Above post shows nothing, as my tracks list is somehow empty. Luckily, most of my tracks are on my playlist here:

https://soundcloud.com/william-a-baurle-1/sets/moinoodlieness

Ian Trevor is my rocker name. Amazingly enough, despite the popularity of first and surnames, there are precious few Ian Trevors out there; at least, few that show up on a Google search.

If you should ever want to read more of my poetry, the link to my blog is in my profile, and in the drop-down menu on posts.

Thanks for the limericks. I've read them before. Sounds like Lear, who popularized the identical rhymes for Lines 1 & 5. Funny you referred to me as WAB. I signed all my lyrics that way, all caps with no periods, when I was in a band; I also sign certain things, like at a pharmacy, with WAB, in cursive.

By the by, I have moved out of my abusive brother's apartment and am shacking up with my parents until I go to the Funny Farm. So, I should have plenty of time to make an asshat of myself before they drag me away. I also have time to dress up like a girl in my avatar. I might be Marilyn Monroe or Sophia Loren after I get tired of being Percy.

Asshat! Even thinking the word in my head cracks me up!

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Koy,

I am deeply sorry for my snarky post. I am sick and can get very defensive, as you can see.

No worries. And I’m sorry that you’re sick.

 

[WAB]

Koy,

I am deeply sorry for my snarky post. I am sick and can get very defensive, as you can see.

No worries. And I’m sorry that you’re sick.

Koy,

Thank you. Hopefully, with meds and downtime, I can get this bi-polar crap under control finally. I have bailed from any treatment plan I've ever been on, and have stubbornly resisted going inpatient, thinking that I could just keep working joe-jobs and self-medicating. Finally, I am breaking this self-destructive cycle.

Sub, et all,

I posted a few limericks I wrote for National Limerick Day, 2013, in the New Poetry thread.

[...and now...] For a little philosophical levity, I found this on Pinterest, on a Spinoza fanpage. I thought it was hilarious:

 

[Subsymbolic]

Again, no argument of any kind.

Music is something experienced. Sound is an experience.

It is not something out in the world.

There's a profound difference between argument you don't recognise or understand and no argument. But, I tell you what, here's your favourite refrain - prove to me, objectively, that anyone ever experiences.

Because I can prove objectively and without recourse to brains that music exists independently of brains:

http://evolver.fm/2012/10/10/top-5-apps-for-identifying-songs/

Explain how these work if there's no music in the world independent of experience...

Cue equivocation in 3...2...1...

Easy:
Because we humans build tools that mimic how we experience music.

Not so easy for inter, because he needs a mind with conscious experience to do that...

 

[untermensche]

Because we humans build tools that mimic how we experience music.

No we do not.

We build devices that create the stimulations that cause a brain to create the experience of music. All we understand are the external stimulations and the mechanics of the ear. How a vibration becomes something experienced is totally unknown. How any experience is created is totally unknown.

Music is an experience in minds.

All sounds are experiences that have nothing to do with the stimulations that created them. Like colors. Vibrating air does not have a sound. Bats turn it into a sight.

 

[DBT]

Music is just sounds.

Sounds are experienced in minds.

They do not exist anywhere else or as anything besides an experience.

Music begins with the architecture of the instrument, which determines acoustic range, tone, etc, of vibrating air, the player and the listener. It is the brain of both the player and the listener (audience), that interprets the information of patterns of vibrating air input via the auditory system as music, rhythms and tones that are pleasing to the audience.....

 

[untermensche]

Music begins with the architecture of the instrument, which determines acoustic range, tone, etc, of vibrating air, the player and the listener.

The stimulation that a brain transforms into the experience of music begins that way.

But the stimulation has nothing to do with music beyond stimulating it's creation.

Music is a transformation of the stimulation just like color is a transformation of the stimulation.

Vibrations of air are not sound. They are turned into sights by bats.

It is the brain of both the player and the listener (audience), that interprets the information of patterns of vibrating air input via the auditory system as music, rhythms and tones that are pleasing to the audience.....

It is not an interpretation.

It is an arbitrary transformation into something completely different.

 

[ruby sparks]

http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/images/per...2012/FP2012_readings/Dennett_RealPatterns.pdf

At least Ruby will enjoy it...

I've started it and resorted to skimming when time ran out. I hope to get the time to finish it, and I suspect I'll have to read it at least three times before I can grasp it properly. But at first sight, it seems like very good, dense, thorough reading with lots to chew on.

 

[ruby sparks]

Because we humans build tools that mimic how we experience music.

No we do not.

We build devices that create the stimulations that cause a brain to create the experience of music. All we understand are the external stimulations and the mechanics of the ear. How a vibration becomes something experienced is totally unknown. How any experience is created is totally unknown.

Music is an experience in minds.

All sounds are experiences that have nothing to do with the stimulations that created them. Like colors. Vibrating air does not have a sound. Bats turn it into a sight.

I partly agree at least. At this point (with Dennett's paper unread and unappreciated) I'm with you that the (mental) experience is not the same as the stimulations.

In one way, it seems obvious, because there is no vibrating air inside my brain (at least I hope not).

A caveat to that would be that it could be the same information being transmitted by different media, and I think that idea has legs, since information is interoperable.

But setting that aside, and allowing that the 'mental experience' isn't, or seems not to be, the electro-chemical activity either, the idea that the experience is neither the stimulation nor the information, but what we might say is 'what it feels like', we are back at qualia. Now, I don't know if you're still unsure about whether qualia exist or not (you seemed to be earlier) but if it's even something you could consider, then something very odd and counterintuitive might be involved here, which we are not going to get at by relying on intuitions.

In other words, we don't know. We don't know how different experience is, we don't know what the differences are. I myself would not necessarily go as far as to say that it's a completely different 'thing' because that invokes a substance dualism I am not fully willing to endorse.