1. Introduction
Let us say that a phenomenal quality or concept, as I will use the terms interchangeably, is “a feature of a conscious state that is notable introspectively, ostensively, as that aspect of the state, the way it feels, appears, etc.” (Loar, 81). The knowledge argument objects to physicalism through establishing conscious experiences as having non-physical properties. In “Epiphenomenal Qualia”, Frank Jackson proposes a thought experiment in which a brilliant neuroscientist named Mary is “forced to investigate the world from a black and white room via a black and white television monitor” (Jackson, 275). Specializing in the neurophysiology of vision, Mary has acquired all physical information regarding the physical and neurological …show more content…
Jackson makes the claim that phenomenal concepts and physical concepts are distinctive (Jackson, 273). I do not deny that phenomenal concepts and physical concepts are cognitively independent, but do insist that such concepts are distinctive from facts entirely. According to Loar, “phenomenal concepts” are recognitional/imaginative concepts” (Loar, 87). Jackson is correct in stating that Mary lacked conceptual knowledge about the experiences of others. It is clear that Mary learned something upon her release and that she gained knowledge, but that knowledge and understanding points toward the same facts she already knew in physical terms. For example, imagine that you know everything there is to know about a Ferris wheel. You know its size, weight, individual parts, how much weight it can hold, and so on. If you, like Mary, had been stuck in the same black and white room for the entirety of your life, you would be able to build an exact replica of the Ferris wheel of which you have knowledge. Suppose that for some reason you cannot build this Ferris wheel or you choose not to. Perhaps you are physically incapable of building it on your own or don’t have access to the necessary equipment. Upon release from your own black and white room, you go to where this Ferris wheel is located. You see it and you ride it yourself. Would you have learned a new fact about the Ferris wheel? The knowledge argument claims out that because you gained knew knowledge, it follows that you gained a new fact and that this fact is non-physical. You would now understand the what it’s like aspect of experiencing a Ferris wheel. You would be able to reference your experience and, perhaps, even understand the experiences of others through introspection. All of this information may be true, but still only apply to the same facts: the Ferris wheel exists, it is made up of certain parts, it holds a certain weight, etc. Only now,
Let us say that a phenomenal quality or concept, as I will use the terms interchangeably, is “a feature of a conscious state that is notable introspectively, ostensively, as that aspect of the state, the way it feels, appears, etc.” (Loar, 81). The knowledge argument objects to physicalism through establishing conscious experiences as having non-physical properties. In “Epiphenomenal Qualia”, Frank Jackson proposes a thought experiment in which a brilliant neuroscientist named Mary is “forced to investigate the world from a black and white room via a black and white television monitor” (Jackson, 275). Specializing in the neurophysiology of vision, Mary has acquired all physical information regarding the physical and neurological …show more content…
Jackson makes the claim that phenomenal concepts and physical concepts are distinctive (Jackson, 273). I do not deny that phenomenal concepts and physical concepts are cognitively independent, but do insist that such concepts are distinctive from facts entirely. According to Loar, “phenomenal concepts” are recognitional/imaginative concepts” (Loar, 87). Jackson is correct in stating that Mary lacked conceptual knowledge about the experiences of others. It is clear that Mary learned something upon her release and that she gained knowledge, but that knowledge and understanding points toward the same facts she already knew in physical terms. For example, imagine that you know everything there is to know about a Ferris wheel. You know its size, weight, individual parts, how much weight it can hold, and so on. If you, like Mary, had been stuck in the same black and white room for the entirety of your life, you would be able to build an exact replica of the Ferris wheel of which you have knowledge. Suppose that for some reason you cannot build this Ferris wheel or you choose not to. Perhaps you are physically incapable of building it on your own or don’t have access to the necessary equipment. Upon release from your own black and white room, you go to where this Ferris wheel is located. You see it and you ride it yourself. Would you have learned a new fact about the Ferris wheel? The knowledge argument claims out that because you gained knew knowledge, it follows that you gained a new fact and that this fact is non-physical. You would now understand the what it’s like aspect of experiencing a Ferris wheel. You would be able to reference your experience and, perhaps, even understand the experiences of others through introspection. All of this information may be true, but still only apply to the same facts: the Ferris wheel exists, it is made up of certain parts, it holds a certain weight, etc. Only now,