Brent, I guess I am Qualia Blind because I just don't understand what you are referring to. And if it cannot be tested using scientific methods, I am not interested. But thanks for trying to educate me. John On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 3:28 PM Brent Allsop <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I don’t think we are talking past each other. Let me try saying it this > way. > > > > You are still only thinking of “red” functionally, which is qualitatively > ambiguous. In order to define something, qualitatively, you need to > indicate a specific set of physical properties, for which the word is a > label for. You use it to represent any and all the different physical > things YOU interpret as representing “red” functionality such as “harm”, > “homeostasis” (“democrat vs republican”?) In order to not be qualitatively > ambiguous (not be qualia blind) you need to use different terms to talk a > about different physical properties or qualities. In the “Representational > Qualia Theory > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__canonizer.com_topic_88-2DRepresentational-2DQualia_6-23statement&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=C5897ZGG5XvT-gYxkPtQhe_Ux7cuCBMJJwaQ-n_P2c0&s=0V4irifRxkLjizEgwma13UhPZcka9fzAmqJzdKh9uD0&e=>” > statement, we point out that we use the term “red” as a label for physical > properties that include reflecting or emitting “red” (650 NM) light. We > use a different word “redness” which is a label for a very different > physical quality, the final result of the perception process. Redness is a > different label for a different physical quality we can be directly aware > of. > > > > You never use any other words, except “red” when talking about physical > qualities. You are still doing this here. When qualia blind people say > “red”, you can’t tell if they are talking about the properties of the > strawberry, the redness quality of their knowledge of the strawberry, or > someone else’s knowledge of the same strawberry (or them, wearing red/green > inverting glasses), which is like their greenness knowledge. > > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 6:55 AM JOHN TORDAY <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Hi Gregg and TOK, thank you for your kind words and thoughts. The intent >> of invoking Relativity Theory is to be all-inclusive, but it may be a >> 'bridge too far'.....gotta have goals. >> I think that 'pain' is subjective, and may/not mean 'ouch'.....in a plant >> it may just be an aversive reaction to something that it finds undesirable. >> Given that we are mobile whereas plants are not I wouldn't think that >> 'ouch' would be response, but the net result would be the same-ish. I have >> attached a recent paper by Frantisek Baluska, a German botonist and Arthur >> Reber, a clinical psychologist that may/not be of interest. Frantisek is >> the Keynote Speaker at that Consciousness meeting I am also speaking at >> fyi.....John >> >> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 7:54 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx < >> [log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >>> Hi TOK, >>> >>> Cool thoughts, John. On this topic, here are some interesting articles >>> about what plants might “feel” that my brother shared with me: >>> >>> >>> >>> *https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.peta.org_about-2Dpeta_faq_what-2Dabout-2Dplants_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=PhigcW6_bRuf7Ek36mD3xrdtlnPGadplfkN1dPqbtGE&s=-GIqoDx245SnI2hshBhILo0t0eb685Xqo78iCGgleK0&e= >>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.peta.org_about-2Dpeta_faq_what-2Dabout-2Dplants_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=U03kSP2uYVWZ6m5RezM0t4bwvIrwBgT7ExgKR0DHTFQ&s=qDqAEERAVjbKT2-vhqfgTq91kAfgCMIbRSt6WFgU89c&e=>* >>> >>> >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__science.howstuffworks.com_life_botany_plants-2Dfeel-2Dpain.htm&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=PhigcW6_bRuf7Ek36mD3xrdtlnPGadplfkN1dPqbtGE&s=EKkU17HPdHUDboqP2oHug-JwA0NgsLtfYCp5mBpWevc&e= >>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__science.howstuffworks.com_life_botany_plants-2Dfeel-2Dpain.htm&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=wjF8cZoiFchamTuxBdDEmw&m=K3sr1bqZ0C1vQ-EBF9LTt5e4QFOjnSJzQB3uqW3f0Y0&s=Q6lxSBOL5wQSmBZSRxrY5dnR5cuiwWQSVo6HdEEkxiY&e=> >>> >>> >>> >>> For me, I completely agree that this stuff demonstrates plants exhibit >>> aversion and withdrawal behaviors that are the roots of what we call >>> “pain”. I would like to call them “proto-pain-behaviors”. However, I am a >>> skeptic regarding “plant sentience,” although they clearly exhibit >>> functional avoidance and aversion responses. When my son Jon badly broke >>> his arm, the docs put him under and they tried to set it. Andee and I >>> watched as his body writhed and he moaned and he pulled away. Was he “in >>> pain” or did he “feel pain” as it happened? One of my “flashbulb” memories >>> was when, twenty minutes later, he woke up and cried out “I am alive!”. I >>> don’t think he felt pain during that time, at least in any we mean the term >>> (although you might argue yes and he does not remember). Yet he exhibited >>> behavior that was far more indicative of pain than the evidence cited for >>> plant pain. The body (ours and plants) has lots of “functional awareness >>> and response” mechanisms in it…but it is always tricky to sort out what >>> observers see as patterns of behavior and what is (or is not) going on at >>> the first person level of experience. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Gregg >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion < >>> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *JOHN TORDAY >>> *Sent:* Friday, May 31, 2019 6:21 AM >>> *To:* [log in to unmask] >>> *Subject:* Qualia >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Brent and TOK, in putting together a brief talk on Consciousness, I >>> had to reduce my cell biologic approach to the problem due to time >>> constraints. So I decided to start with E=mc2 as the mathematical >>> expression of the Singularity of the Cosmos (I assume we're all good on >>> Einstein). Based on that 'logic', development of the embryo as cell-cell >>> signaling is the conversion of 'mass' (growth factors) into 'energy' (the >>> downstream interaction of the growth factor with its receptor (think 'lock >>> and key'), triggering an intracellular cascade of high energy phosphates >>> that ultimately affect growth and differentiation of the embryo, >>> culminating in homeostatic physiology at birth. The aggregate of those >>> cell-cell interactions is Consciousness, bearing in mind that the origin of >>> the brain is the skin as a graphic. That would explain Qualia as the way in >>> which experiences trigger consciousness, i.e. why seeing 'red' free >>> associates with the physiology of the individual, bearing in mind that >>> those homeostatic signaling cascades reference not only the physiology of >>> the current individual, but their past experiences as a species as >>> evolution too, so the Qualia go way back in the history of the organism. I >>> hope that was helpful. >>> >>> ############################ >>> >>> 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 >>> ############################ >>> >>> 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 >>> >> ############################ >> >> 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 >> > ############################ > > 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 > ############################ 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