Another long interview with Bernardo, that the interviewer says is his (the interviewer) best ever.
https://pattersoninpursuit.libsyn.com/a-...do-kastrup
Oh my God, I hate all this.
(This post was last modified: 2019-09-02, 09:08 AM by Stan Woolley.)
I haven’t seen his PhD interview yet, but did anyone ask him why, if qualia are fundamental, the redness of red varies so much between observers, based on well understood interactions between light and biology?
This post has been deleted.
This post has been deleted.
From BK himself, two new interviews:
Quote:1) Raw footage of an interview with Jon Restorick for his upcoming podcast. It contains about 2.5 hours of material. The conversation starts slow, begins to warm up fast towards the middle, and then enters some surprising territory in the last third or so. We discuss things I've never publicly talked about before, such as my views on mind's 'prime directive.' Note the first part is in the link Stan gave above =-=-= (2019-09-09, 05:44 PM)malf Wrote: I haven’t seen his PhD interview yet, but did anyone ask him why, if qualia are fundamental, the redness of red varies so much between observers, based on well understood interactions between light and biology? He might have answered this, but can you give more detail on the "redness of red" and how it varies?
'Historically, we may regard materialism as a system of dogma set up to combat orthodox dogma...Accordingly we find that, as ancient orthodoxies disintegrate, materialism more and more gives way to scepticism.'
(This post was last modified: 2019-09-10, 02:49 PM by Sciborg_S_Patel.)
- Bertrand Russell
Different folk see red differently. We know this from their mistakes on Ishihara testing, or similar.
(2019-09-10, 06:20 PM)malf Wrote: Different folk see red differently. We know this from their mistakes on Ishihara testing, or similar. If you're asking about mind/brain correlations that does come up in the dissertation interview, at least if I'm remembering correctly as I listen to these in the car to/from work.
'Historically, we may regard materialism as a system of dogma set up to combat orthodox dogma...Accordingly we find that, as ancient orthodoxies disintegrate, materialism more and more gives way to scepticism.'
- Bertrand Russell
"Reply" is messed up for me...
No. I'm asking why if "experiential qualia" are "fundamental" we don't all "experience" them the same. 
(2019-09-11, 09:54 PM)malf Wrote: "Reply" is messed up for me... This has always been my issue. I don't even think qualia are real, I think they really are just the result of calculations of one form or another. My reasons are difference though. Being legally blind and then having out of body experiences where suddenly all my blind spots go away is one. Given I can't even imagine visuals in those blindspots it seems like their existence is tied to biology purely. Likewise the one time I possessed a cat. Seeing through its eyes was fascinating. It seemed to highlight anything that was an edge, and even though it seemed like everything was more or less black and white, or at least severely muted colours it almost seemed to make it easier to pick things out. It now makes so much sense to me how cats can be such good predators. Colour vision would've gotten in the way. But it also makes sense why they can make the errors they do when jumping, like jumping into water because it looked like the shore was there. This was clearly a result of the cats brain, since I was not a cat in any sort of "soul" way, but I was still experiencing it anyways.
"The cure for bad information is more information."
|
![[-]](https://psiencequest.net/forums/images/collapse.png)