Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

6
  • is empirical evidence - in your first sentence, the right terminology? "our perception of volume depends on pitch" thanks!
    – user6917
    Commented Aug 27, 2014 at 16:49
  • 1
    How is this answer related to the question?
    – nir
    Commented Aug 27, 2014 at 16:56
  • I interpret these ideas as a way to argue for the existence of qualia: qualia are apparent phenomena (at least at the day to day, high level description of things) and they are sufficiently distinct from the stimuli themselves to warrant differentiation as distinct entities.
    – Dave
    Commented Aug 27, 2014 at 17:01
  • 1
    Did the OP ask for arguments that qualia exists?
    – nir
    Commented Aug 27, 2014 at 17:24
  • "How have philosophers tried to do this [convince someone who doesn't believe there is something it is like, that there is], without begging the question?" seems to ask for arguments that qualia exist; Note that in response to the preceding comment I have edited this answer to ensure that it addresses (my interpretation of) this aspect of the OP's question directly and explicitly.
    – Dave
    Commented Aug 28, 2014 at 21:37