Analysis Of Dennett 's ' Qualia '

1043 Words Apr 12th, 2016 5 Pages
memory has changed when comparing the two. Since qualia cannot be used to verify claims about qualia, they are content-less and incoherent – or so Dennett’s tale goes.
IV. Dennett contra 'Qualia ' Dennett is a man upset. A man upset about qualia – he seems appalled that something could exist which cannot be tested or used in some way to verify something. In fact, Dennett seems so upset about qualia he created his own idea of it, and argued against that instead of a more charitably (or correctly) understood definition. How, then, to prove the qualia Dennett uses is a strawman? Let’s start by discussing his two examples –first, with pump 5/6 on neurosurgery. Recall that Dennett believes the neurosurgeon showed that our qualia are less than private and immediately apprehensible. The neurosurgeon knew our qualia better– we could not tell what was changed between our memory of past qualia and our current qualia. Dennett thinks pump 5/6 does particularly well in undermining the apprehensibility of qualia– after all, the qualia itself seems useless is telling us just what has happened during the surgery. Except, qualia never could. The neurosurgeon, if he or she changed our memory, would still change our qualia – our qualia of the memory. Dennett didn’t seem to understand the scope of qualia here – or that we produce it automatically from intending our consciousness toward anything at all, including memory. We have qualia of remembering, qualia of past states, real qualia…
Open Document