Jeffrey_Kaplan_on_David_Chalmers_2002_Puzzle_paper

as a continuation of my comment on Jeffrey Kaplan’s video about the “hard” problem:

Chalmers did point out the difference between the “easy” and the “hard” problems (which philosophers have been wondering about ever since without calling it “hard”), but the three paths he suggests as possible solutions (and their alleys) are hopelessly wrong. I wonder if he has written a follow up paper 20+ years after his initial views and suggestions.

The core of the hard problem of consciousness is semiological; obviously not anatomical or reductively physical/physiological (indeed, because we are conscious ;-)) since animals (even if all social) with such diverse phylogenetic tracks, different anatomy and nervous systems, as well as languages as fish, bats, humans, ants and those crabs they found living by the hydrothermal vents along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge are all conscious.

There are three essential aspects to the semiology of conscioussness: a) while using signs (with their signifie[d-r] dichotomy (and anything you are able to learn, even navigating the space around you, you -functionally- must do semiologically)), as we communicate with one another/our environment; b) we are all outer intersubjectively (noticed I didn’t say “objectively” in more of a Kantian „Ding an sich” sort of way), socially keeping the two sides of the signs not only in an expressed way out there (we “physically” say it and put it in writing as kind of memory aids, checking realizations), but, also, one integrally keeps one’s own inner intersubjective aspect of the sign to one self all the way up the association between whatever happens in one’s own brain and the phenomenal qualia related to it (as an inner reflection of the outer [d-r] dichotomy in whichever physiological processes happen in the brain). There is no “the” blueness or redness of blue or red. One keeps one’s own “blueness” (which is obvious by the way Daltonism was discovered), … as one socially communicates (“as we intersubjectively ‘exchange’ one another’s ‘blueness'”): I was really glad (even confused in this “post modernistic” age of nonsense and “alternate facts”) … :

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R115QLRWYD52M8/

c) in this way also, the problem of the universals is essentially related to not only the hard problem of consciousness, but communication in general …