Hacker News Reader

If his theory boils down to an acceptance of qualia as evidence of non-physical (extra-physical, super-natural, dualist, whatever) basis for consciousness, then a) I am open to it but b) he has done a terrible job conveying this idea clearly.

View on HN

He seems to be saying that it is a physical process, but that it is not computational. My critique was that he does do while describing it entirely in terms of processing information.

> He seems to be saying that it is a physical process, but that it is not computational

This is a contradiction in terms, is it not?

And we have no reason to believe that qualia, defined in that way, exist at all. Or that the notion is even logically consistent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com