3 ms·
It seems to me that philosophy has made zero progress on the hard problem, other than naming it. Is there any concrete progress, any useful result you can point
by iainmerrick 9y ago
It seems to me that philosophy has made zero progress on the hard problem, other than naming it. Is there any concrete progress, any useful result you can point me at?
Neuroscience and computer science obviously haven't solved it either, but they have at least made some progress in understanding parts of the brain's structure, and gradually reproducing what we thought were uniquely human abilities with mindless computer programs. This suggests that "qualia" may not really be needed to explain consciousness (or at any rate thought); just as Darwin's theories showed why "god" isn't strictly needed to explain the diversity of animal species.
I agree there's still the niggling issue of "but why do I seem to experience stuff? Surely I'm not a mindless automaton!" There's also the problem of "but why does the universe exist in the first place?" But I don't believe philosophers have any particular insight or knowledge to bring to the first problem, any more than theologians have any real inside knowledge of the latter.