6 ms·
If he were capable of describing subjective experience in words with the exactitude you're asking for, then his central argument would be false. The point is th
by biophysboy 1y ago
If he were capable of describing subjective experience in words with the exactitude you're asking for, then his central argument would be false. The point is that objective measures, like writing, are external, and cannot describe internal subjective experience. Its one thing to probe the atoms; its another thing to be the atoms themselves.
Basically his answer to the question "What is it like to be a bat?" is that its impossible to know.
- cwmoore 1y agoTautologically, its “batty”.
- glenstein 1y ago>If he were capable of describing subjective experience in words with the exactitude you're asking for, then his central argument would be false. Indeed! Makes you think: maybe it's a bug rather than a feature.
- markhahn 1y agoWorship of subjectivity is a tell for Mysterianism.