> What does "inseparable" mean? That the sensation occurs at the same time that the neurons fire? That may be true, but it doesn't make them equivalent.
Can a sensation exist without neurons firing? The root of our conversation is the question if a sensation purely exists in the physical world. If it does, then it is possible to measure it. If it doesn't, then that breaks our scientific understanding of the world and would be exciting news.
> They're not the same, for what it's worth. The term "flashlight" conveys a certain intent and structure that "photons traveling away from a light bulb with a battery and a current" does not.
Yes there is no strict definition of a flashlight. Let's use your definition of a flashlight. Is it possible in your mind to separate the concept of a flashlight and your definition? Without "your definition here", the flashlight no longer exists. My point was without firing neurons, the sensation does not exist.
> The fact that two different phenomena are closely coupled via a cause and effect relationship does not make them the same phenomena.
My wording was not the best. My point was that the sensation of red is physically equivalent to neurons firing. How do we measure a sensation? If we cannot measure a sensation, does it exist in the physical world? If it doesn't exist in the physical world, then what does it existence mean to the scientific community?
> If you push two magnets together, the fact that the same force causes them to attract or repel does not mean that the motion of the first is literally equivalent to the motion of the second, or that the force itself is literally equivalent to either motion. They are closely correlated, but ultimately distinct.
I agree that these forces are distinct. We can measure the force of each magnet separately and we can define the motion of one magnet without referencing the motion of the other.
> You just can't avoid the fact that qualitative phenomena do exist in their own right. They can't be explained away using a physical model that assumes from the get go that they don't exist.
What is a qualitative phenomena? I couldn't find information on this term.
If we can't measure a qualitative phenomena in the physical space, what does it mean to exist?
These discussions are normally expositions of how the other party misunderstands reality and or terminology with a dash of if i don't understand it but can vaguely describe it then it must be inexplicable.
Can a sensation exist without neurons firing? The root of our conversation is the question if a sensation purely exists in the physical world. If it does, then it is possible to measure it. If it doesn't, then that breaks our scientific understanding of the world and would be exciting news.
> They're not the same, for what it's worth. The term "flashlight" conveys a certain intent and structure that "photons traveling away from a light bulb with a battery and a current" does not.
Yes there is no strict definition of a flashlight. Let's use your definition of a flashlight. Is it possible in your mind to separate the concept of a flashlight and your definition? Without "your definition here", the flashlight no longer exists. My point was without firing neurons, the sensation does not exist.
> The fact that two different phenomena are closely coupled via a cause and effect relationship does not make them the same phenomena.
My wording was not the best. My point was that the sensation of red is physically equivalent to neurons firing. How do we measure a sensation? If we cannot measure a sensation, does it exist in the physical world? If it doesn't exist in the physical world, then what does it existence mean to the scientific community?
> If you push two magnets together, the fact that the same force causes them to attract or repel does not mean that the motion of the first is literally equivalent to the motion of the second, or that the force itself is literally equivalent to either motion. They are closely correlated, but ultimately distinct.
I agree that these forces are distinct. We can measure the force of each magnet separately and we can define the motion of one magnet without referencing the motion of the other.
> You just can't avoid the fact that qualitative phenomena do exist in their own right. They can't be explained away using a physical model that assumes from the get go that they don't exist.
What is a qualitative phenomena? I couldn't find information on this term.
If we can't measure a qualitative phenomena in the physical space, what does it mean to exist?