Monist vs. Dualist Experiment?

[genkaus]

... and why you just assert that qualia is algorithmic without presenting any clear reason that justifies your assertion.

I've given the reason plenty of times. The fact that subjective experience can be altered by altering the brain chemistry indicates that the relationship between the two is similar to that between hardware and software.

---

There's no physical tell which can extend the knowledge of self to knowledge about others.

Only because you start with that assumption.

Just because I have qualia and do behavior X doesn't necessarily mean that behavior X implies qualia.

Unless, you do behavior X because of your qualia and have no reasonable alternate explanation for behavior X - in which case, it does imply qualia.

It's a false syllogism no matter how you word it. Now, it's true that believing in a false syllogism isn't the same as taking something as given. But for someone who DOES see the false syllogism, they will only be able to accept the argument if they are willing to assume it.

Except, its not a false syllogism and wording has nothing to do with it.

Is this a new equivocation? I can't think of a behavior that isn't defined in mechanical terms. Blushing? No, that's just blood flow-- no qualia required. Crying? Nope, just an opening of tear ducts combined with cyclical shuddering and modified breathing-- no qualia required.

Really? So you have evidence of these behavior occurring in you or others where they take place without qualia?

---

I would go further, bennyboy, and say that verbal reports like, "I am in pain," do not guarantee that the person giving that report are actually in pain. No qualia required.

No - what guarantees it is all the rest of the stuff associated with pain - such as grimacing, flinching, changes in body chemistry and activation of cerebral centers associated with pain.