> >experiential qualia are horses of a different choler.
>
> QUALIA-
>
> Inflected Form(s): plural qualia
> Etymology: Latin, neuter of qualis of what kind
> Date: 1675
> 1 : a property (as redness) considered apart from things having the
> property
> 2 : a property as it is experienced as distinct from any source it might
> have in a physical object
>
> Looks like 'experiential qualia' is a tautology, yes?
>
> It's what I _do_ with this 'redness', then, not that I see it- in that I
> might view it as sexy, or bombastic, etc. We're accepting a high degree
> of inter-subjectivity with perceptions of the objective, (with exceptions
> due to mutations), but maintaining there is a distinct internal process
> of apperception, with no congruence? My 'red' is not your 'red',
> inevitably?
> That only seems like some level of a game to me....
>
No, you might perceive all reds as I perceive all blues, but there's no
way to know that if when we are asked what red is, we each point to
those things that we were taught had that property when we were
infants (the same things).
> CHOLER-
>
> Function: noun
> Etymology: Middle English coler, from Middle French colere, from Latin
> cholera cholera, from Greek
> Date: 14th century
> 1 a archaic : YELLOW BILE b obsolete : BILE 1a
> 2 obsolete : the quality or state of being bilious
> 3 : ready disposition to irritation
>
> **************************************
> Wade T. Smith
> morbius@channel1.com
> wade_smith@harvard.edu
> **************************************