Monist vs. Dualist Experiment?

[bennyboy]

My acceptance matters precisely because my complicity (or that of anyone else) is required in order for your evidence to be presented as valid.

Wrong again. The validity of evidence is not determined by consensus but by logic. The consensus is a tool to minimize errors in logic.

Wrong again. The validity of evidence is in its ability to demonstrate that an idea about what is real is correct, WITHOUT TAKING AS GIVEN its correctness. Cuz that would be a circle, and circles are bad.

You: I know other people have qualia, because they act like they do.
Me: Prove they aren't just acting like they do.
You: People couldn't act like they do without qualia.
Me: Prove they couldn't act like they do without qualia.
You: Qualia are the brain function that make people act like they do, so when people act like they do, that's evidence of qualia.

The problem is that your "evidence" cannot distinguish between the three simplest possibilities: 1) that every behavior of a certain nature implies qualia; 2) that any physical behavior can be reproduced through physical means, and therefore does not imply qualia; 3) that there's a mix: a behavior is sometimes a response to the experience of qualia, and is sometimes just a mechanical process not associated with qualia. Okay, so we go ahead and gather some of your "evidence:" somebody winks, nods knowingly, laughs politely at your bad jokes, etc. Which of the three possibilities does that evidence support? None, unless you ALREADY believe in one of those three.

You keep using science-y words like hypothesis and evidence. But your hypothesis isn't operationalized in a way that can lead to any meaningful conclusion, and your evidence fails to distinguish between any of the possibilities about what things do/don't have qualia. Don't believe me? Let's move this to a science forum. We'll outline your "hypothesis," your method, and the evidence you're looking for, and see what they say. I already know-- they'll tell you not to bring philosophy into their nice, objective, science.