The Solution to the Problem of Qualia
On October 25, 2019, I received an email by a person who inquired of me as to what my thoughts were on the nature of qualia (singular: quale), e.g., how and why it exists. This person was stuck in a conundrum because they couldn't understand how qualia could ever be explained via, say, a mathematical theorem. I had thought about the nature of qualia before, but this person's inquiry inspired me to think about the issue in a more systematic way.
The answer to this person's question, and hence the answer to the problem of qualia in the field of philosophy, is that the only thing that exists or could ever exist is qualia. Hence, to ask the question as to why qualia exists is the same as asking why logic itself exists. They are simply different aspects of the same thing.
The only thing that exists is qualia. The only thing that exists is logic. Which is actually to say, the only thing that exists is mind.
When we hear, e.g., someone talking, from our mind's perspective, pertaining to the sound domain, all that we are experiencing from that alone is merely the qualia of the person's voice, even though that qualia is produced from sound waves passing through the air and vibrating our eardrums. And those sound waves themselves are described by the mathematics of physics, as is the vibration of our eardrums and the neurological effects caused thereby.
So qualia is produced by mathematics, of which qualia go on to produce mathematics via our response to that qualia, such as giving a reply which is heard by the previous speaker, and hence is experienced as qualia by them. Yet all of these qualia effects are produced via the mathematics of physics.
Qualia is simply a different aspect of logic (i.e., mathematics). Asking why qualia exists is a different way of asking why logic exists. And the only way in which logic could exist is if qualia existed, otherwise there would be no way to experience logic's existence. Further, only mind can experience qualia, and the *only* thing mind experiences is qualia, since qualia *is* the phenomenon of experience.
The following three groupings of statements are triads to better elucidate the relations between qualia, logic and mind:
the thing to be experienced: qualia
the thing determining how experiences can occur: logic
the thing doing the experiencing: mind
the thing providing experiences: qualia
the thing governing experiences: logic
the thing observing experiences: mind
qualia provides experiences
logic governs experiences
mind observes experiences
So in actuality, the only thing that exists in existence is this qualia-logic-mind stuff, and the infinite number of different transformations which it can take on. Qualia, logic and mind aren't different things, but rather are different aspects of the same thing: i.e., this qualia-logic-mind stuff.
Or: logic creates brain (read here as: mind); brain interacting with logic creates qualia. And so on and so on, ad infinitum.
One reason why qualia currently seems so mysterious to us is because we humans are extremely limited in our mentality. Whereas for a technologically-immortal superintelligence, she will have the capacity to easily form her mind to be anything she wants it to be within the limits of her mental computational resources, which will be enormously greater than our mortal mental computational resources.
Hence, for a superintelligence which has complete technological control over her own mental hardware, she can easily rapidly flip through many different combinations of minds, such that she will be able to quickly converge on what the minimal set of mind is required to, e.g., experience the color "red" in its least perceptible form. And then that would be the mathematical definition of the qualia/quale of "red", for the minimal discernible perception of "red" (i.e., liminal red). Moreover, this mathematical definition of "liminal red" could then be shared with other technologically-immortal superintelligences, such that they could experience for themselves that this indeed is the minimal set of mind required to experience "liminal red".
The above is the solution to the problem of qualia. If it should seem dissatisfying to us humans, it's because our mentalities cannot rapidly converge upon the minimal mental sets of various qualia, and this necessarily leaves many details of qualia unanswered. Yet such mental procedures will be no problem for technologically-immortal superintelligences, so they will know a great deal more about such matters than is possible for humans to answer. And as their mentalities diverge to infinite intelligence, eventually everything that can logically be known about qualia--and every other subject--will be known perfectly.
####################
The Principle of the Greater God
It could well be the case that we are in a computer simulation being run by a highly-advanced society. However, there would be no possible tests which we could perform that would reveal that to us unless said society wished to disclose their existence. This simulation hypothesis is actually a variation on the Gnostic heresy.
Though I would think that a superhuman society would create a far more pleasant simulation than this mortal world. If they were malicious--and for various reasons that I've gone over elsewhere, I don't believe they could be--they would certainly be capable of creating a reality far more horrific than this one, bad as this world can be at various times and places.
Rather, the world appears to be more or less what I would expect it to be like if humans are naturally-evolved apes. In a certain very real sense, humans *are* trapped in a computer simulation: that of their mental programs operating on the wet-computer of the human brain. Humans are trapped in the matrix of bad ideas. Almost all of the main societal problems are due to false and destructive ideas.
Yet there exists an even more decisive argument beyond what reasons I've given elsewhere as to why a genuine superintelligence cannot be maleficent, and that is the Principle of the Greater God. Since there are no possible tests which a superintelligent yet still finite entity could perform that would reveal whether she exists in a simulation, she would know that the real possibility exists that she herself is subject to punishment by an even greater god than herself in whose simulation she exists within.
Note that the Greater-God Principle is here merely capitalized for emphasis, as it only applies to finite entities, but not to an infinite intelligence, i.e., it does not apply to God (majuscule G). However, an infinite intelligence would be omnibenevolent, since all error logically discoverable would have been analyzed and refuted. And all infinite intelligences are logically equivalent, since they each know the infinite everything that the others know, and have analyzed and refuted the same errors. Hence, there exists only one God: as a "difference" with no difference is not different.
####################
[Continued in a following post.]
On October 25, 2019, I received an email by a person who inquired of me as to what my thoughts were on the nature of qualia (singular: quale), e.g., how and why it exists. This person was stuck in a conundrum because they couldn't understand how qualia could ever be explained via, say, a mathematical theorem. I had thought about the nature of qualia before, but this person's inquiry inspired me to think about the issue in a more systematic way.
The answer to this person's question, and hence the answer to the problem of qualia in the field of philosophy, is that the only thing that exists or could ever exist is qualia. Hence, to ask the question as to why qualia exists is the same as asking why logic itself exists. They are simply different aspects of the same thing.
The only thing that exists is qualia. The only thing that exists is logic. Which is actually to say, the only thing that exists is mind.
When we hear, e.g., someone talking, from our mind's perspective, pertaining to the sound domain, all that we are experiencing from that alone is merely the qualia of the person's voice, even though that qualia is produced from sound waves passing through the air and vibrating our eardrums. And those sound waves themselves are described by the mathematics of physics, as is the vibration of our eardrums and the neurological effects caused thereby.
So qualia is produced by mathematics, of which qualia go on to produce mathematics via our response to that qualia, such as giving a reply which is heard by the previous speaker, and hence is experienced as qualia by them. Yet all of these qualia effects are produced via the mathematics of physics.
Qualia is simply a different aspect of logic (i.e., mathematics). Asking why qualia exists is a different way of asking why logic exists. And the only way in which logic could exist is if qualia existed, otherwise there would be no way to experience logic's existence. Further, only mind can experience qualia, and the *only* thing mind experiences is qualia, since qualia *is* the phenomenon of experience.
The following three groupings of statements are triads to better elucidate the relations between qualia, logic and mind:
the thing to be experienced: qualia
the thing determining how experiences can occur: logic
the thing doing the experiencing: mind
the thing providing experiences: qualia
the thing governing experiences: logic
the thing observing experiences: mind
qualia provides experiences
logic governs experiences
mind observes experiences
So in actuality, the only thing that exists in existence is this qualia-logic-mind stuff, and the infinite number of different transformations which it can take on. Qualia, logic and mind aren't different things, but rather are different aspects of the same thing: i.e., this qualia-logic-mind stuff.
Or: logic creates brain (read here as: mind); brain interacting with logic creates qualia. And so on and so on, ad infinitum.
One reason why qualia currently seems so mysterious to us is because we humans are extremely limited in our mentality. Whereas for a technologically-immortal superintelligence, she will have the capacity to easily form her mind to be anything she wants it to be within the limits of her mental computational resources, which will be enormously greater than our mortal mental computational resources.
Hence, for a superintelligence which has complete technological control over her own mental hardware, she can easily rapidly flip through many different combinations of minds, such that she will be able to quickly converge on what the minimal set of mind is required to, e.g., experience the color "red" in its least perceptible form. And then that would be the mathematical definition of the qualia/quale of "red", for the minimal discernible perception of "red" (i.e., liminal red). Moreover, this mathematical definition of "liminal red" could then be shared with other technologically-immortal superintelligences, such that they could experience for themselves that this indeed is the minimal set of mind required to experience "liminal red".
The above is the solution to the problem of qualia. If it should seem dissatisfying to us humans, it's because our mentalities cannot rapidly converge upon the minimal mental sets of various qualia, and this necessarily leaves many details of qualia unanswered. Yet such mental procedures will be no problem for technologically-immortal superintelligences, so they will know a great deal more about such matters than is possible for humans to answer. And as their mentalities diverge to infinite intelligence, eventually everything that can logically be known about qualia--and every other subject--will be known perfectly.
####################
The Principle of the Greater God
It could well be the case that we are in a computer simulation being run by a highly-advanced society. However, there would be no possible tests which we could perform that would reveal that to us unless said society wished to disclose their existence. This simulation hypothesis is actually a variation on the Gnostic heresy.
Though I would think that a superhuman society would create a far more pleasant simulation than this mortal world. If they were malicious--and for various reasons that I've gone over elsewhere, I don't believe they could be--they would certainly be capable of creating a reality far more horrific than this one, bad as this world can be at various times and places.
Rather, the world appears to be more or less what I would expect it to be like if humans are naturally-evolved apes. In a certain very real sense, humans *are* trapped in a computer simulation: that of their mental programs operating on the wet-computer of the human brain. Humans are trapped in the matrix of bad ideas. Almost all of the main societal problems are due to false and destructive ideas.
Yet there exists an even more decisive argument beyond what reasons I've given elsewhere as to why a genuine superintelligence cannot be maleficent, and that is the Principle of the Greater God. Since there are no possible tests which a superintelligent yet still finite entity could perform that would reveal whether she exists in a simulation, she would know that the real possibility exists that she herself is subject to punishment by an even greater god than herself in whose simulation she exists within.
Note that the Greater-God Principle is here merely capitalized for emphasis, as it only applies to finite entities, but not to an infinite intelligence, i.e., it does not apply to God (majuscule G). However, an infinite intelligence would be omnibenevolent, since all error logically discoverable would have been analyzed and refuted. And all infinite intelligences are logically equivalent, since they each know the infinite everything that the others know, and have analyzed and refuted the same errors. Hence, there exists only one God: as a "difference" with no difference is not different.
####################
[Continued in a following post.]
