Anti-Mystery / Pro-Parsimony Debate
Overview
References to qualia that reject CF seem to make qualia some mysterious, first person phenomenon that is forever beyond the reach of science – a philosophical mystery that we can never make progress on. Whereas Occam's Razor and epistemological parsimony would suggest that, if a simple physical functionalist explanation seems to suffice, it should be preferred over a mysterious explanation.
Responses
It is possible to discuss qualia in rigorous ways that do not retreat to 'mystery' or 'ineffability', e.g. affirmative ostension or contrastive ostension definitions. Whether CF is parsimonious depends on whether it truly can account for conscious experience.
See Natural Selection argument.
Further reading
- Chalmers D (2020). Debunking Arguments for Illusionism about Consciousness