(September 1, 2021 at 4:49 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: You might be a functionalist. Functionalists tend to take a "yeah whatever" attitude to qualia. I like functionalism. It's a tidy view. Very appealing to those with scientific sensibilities.
What makes qualia interesting to metaphysicians is that we have zero understanding about it. Yes, yes, we know the causal mechanism by which these conscious states are produced, but why we see red as red... (the actual world is colorless)... things like that... if you really think about it, it's quite mysterious that we experience things the way we do. It seems reasonable to want to ask questions about it.
The functionalist wants to say that qualia are perceived the way they are because they serve that function to the organism. For instance, a pin prick to the finger produces pain. Pain (a qualitative experience) serves a function...-- and the function explains the quality of the experience. The problem with functionalism (to me) is that it works just as well without consciousness. The functionalist wants to "explain the mind away" so to speak.... when what's really at issue is that consciousness is a huge mystery.
But, again, I like functionalism. It's a pretty solid theory IMO.
Perhaps I am a functionalist. The senses have to perceived in some way. They have to illicit some response from the conscious mind to be part of our experience. I just don't see the magic in it. Again, experience is a dynamic process. Someone may look at what parts of the brain light up when we see (or imagine) red as opposed to blue, but that is like trying to infer the full experience of a baseball game from examining the skid marks on the infield.
