Knowledge Argument for Qualia

A thought experiment in which Mary knows every physical fact about colors, but has never seen any colors as she lives in a black-and-white room.

Argument

P1: Mary knows all the physical facts about red
P2: Mary doesn't know what its like to see red
-- Contr --
IC: Not every fact is a physical fact
C : Physicalism is false

Responses

Qualia

If Physicalism is true, then mary knows everything about color experiences. Though, it is apparent that something fundamental is missing in her understanding of colors. this is Qualia

Denying Validity of Argument

New Knowledge Old Fact Response

Mary does learn something new, but she doesn’t learn a new fact, she learns an old fact under a new guise. Often endorsed by those who believe in Identity Theory and A Posteriori Physicalism.

Leibniz’ Law Fallacy Response

Mary’s understanding of red and not red follows the same structure of a Leibniz’ law fallacy. The argument below is a fallacy:

P1: Mary knows all facts about red except for its sensation
P2: Mary does not know what its like to see red
-- Lebiniz' Law --
C: Therefore, she does not know red

• This is brought up to say that mary doesn’t learn a new fact, she just relearns an old fact
• This is to say that this is a bad argument since it presuposes its own conclusion (“she knows everything, but she doesn’t know this”)

Learning Non-Factual Knowledge

Experience is not factual knowledge. When Mary sees the new color, she does not learn a Fact but rather an ability!