Hi John, > [Qualia are a natural consequence of the vertical integration of > physiology, along with the historic relationships the organism has > experienced. That is particularly true when considering that the brain/mind > is the aggregate of that process, so of course perception is affected by > that cumulative process...seems logical to me] > Yes, I completely agree with you, given your abstract definition of qualia, which is very different than the very physically specific way we define qualia and the word "red". > [I thought my perspective was the minority view in Gregg's camp? or did I > misunderstand? Please advise.] > > > The ToK survey topic <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_207-2DTree-2Dof-2DKnowledge-2D-2D-2DToK-2D_1&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=ubYVLgxTJkhMWmxXwgRhROTg_ePADFmvK_43cmxvz2M&e=> is a different topic that the Theories of Consciousnes <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_88-2DTheories-2Dof-2DConsciousness_1&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=FlLVZOX3aLUlhjQeXw8EoEPW8UFbzqqUmBoeHpxB7pE&e=> topic. The First Principles <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_207-2DFirst-2Dprinciples-2Dformulation_4&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=gQZR6Uz2xTEJCVwp4wBIvhoq8SZcqLyEn1T-QFLwzL4&e=> camp of the ToK topic is waiting for you to join, as a supporter. Gregg isn't yet supporting his Standard Formulation <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_207-2DStandard-2Dformulation_3&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=OXkSwKo7ZgcadRsLcQoXZGkdeEs6rHrq9HzdSFQbwlc&e=> camp either, so if you support yours, it will lead in consensus - at least until he supports his camp. Then there will be equal support, until others start supporting one or the other. So if you have registered with Canonizer.com, you can then go to your First Principles <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_207-2DFirst-2Dprinciples-2Dformulation_4&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=gQZR6Uz2xTEJCVwp4wBIvhoq8SZcqLyEn1T-QFLwzL4&e=> camp and click on the "Join or directly support this camp" button in the support section. The purpose of the Theories of Consciousnes <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_88-2DTheories-2Dof-2DConsciousness_1&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=FlLVZOX3aLUlhjQeXw8EoEPW8UFbzqqUmBoeHpxB7pE&e=> topic is to build as much consensus as possible arround the best theories of consciousness, especially regarding its qualitative nature. The emerging expert consensus <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_81-2DMind-2DExperts_1&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=9useEsHmYuux-KWeHDMZguYyKl1D7D1o9ZEo5K6lcLM&e=> camp, on that topic is "Representational Qualia Theory <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_88-2DRepresentational-2DQualia_6&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=-etuzWJX5E4_mW5hbi3YMj9DPiQrbCXydfbVEOkA9fU&s=piPLwKx0HNbVsBiYdtnX6cBiqTIdn8JGub0JFYJ4mp4&e=>". My way of talking about the qualitative nature of consciousness, and thinking about what is important, comes from this camp. We define qualia to be specific physical qualities we can be directly aware of, like redness and grenness. We use words like "red" and "redness" in different ways than the standard dictionary definition, enabling us to talk about different physical qualities dealing with the perception of "red". Very different than the abstract, undefined way you use words like "red" and "qualia", making it impossible to model the qualitative nature of consciousness. If what you say is correct, about the problematic way I (and the supporters of that camp statement) are talking about things, it would be nice to create a competing camp that would include what you think is important, so we could see if anyone else can understand your point of view. Given such competing camps being "canonized", hopefully someone else that understands our differences better than we do, can clear this issue up for us. Or maybe propose some scientific experiment, the results of which could clear things up - forcing us all into one scientific consensus, maybe some day. Brent ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
