The Knowledge Argument Challenges The Idea Of Consciousness
The knowledge argument challenges the idea that everything that exists in the world is purely physical (physicalism) by claiming that qualia exists and is not a physical property. ‘Qualia’ refers to the properties of a feeling from a conscious experience. For example, the qualia of red when you are looking at something that is red, or the qualia of pain when you have injured yourself. This theory discusses the idea of consciousness that cannot be logically concluded from physicalism through Frank Jackson’s thought experiment. The knowledge argument is strongly demonstrated in Jackson’s thought experiment about consciousness. The thought experiment starts with Mary who is confined black and white room her entire life, learning all physical
…show more content…
This leads to 2, stating Mary then must’ve learnt a fact of a nonohysical property since she had learnt every physical fact whilst in the room. Physicalists cannot accept that she learnt something new upon leaving the room because they claim that all things are physical and if all physical things, then there are no facts about nonphysical properties. However, if there are no facts about nonphysical properties, then knowing all facts means Mary would have know all physical facts. If Mary knew all physical facts about colours, this means she knew all of the true facts about colours and if physicalism were to be true, the knowledge of all physical things would be the exact same thing as complete knowledge simpliciter, since there is nothing over and above that of the physical. In other words, if there were something to have knowledge of that were over and above the physical, then there would have to be something over and above the physical, which is precisely what physicalism denies. According to Jackson, Mary could learn all the physical facts about colour but then experience colour itself, so it is plausible to say that she had learnt something when she sees red the first time. This means there must have been some knowledge she did not hold, but if she had all the physical knowledge whilst in the room, and there are still things that she did not know, we must conclude that she lacks knowledge of nonphysical properties. This leads to 3, where it can be concluded that not all things are physical so physicalism must be
This leads to 2, stating Mary then must’ve learnt a fact of a nonohysical property since she had learnt every physical fact whilst in the room. Physicalists cannot accept that she learnt something new upon leaving the room because they claim that all things are physical and if all physical things, then there are no facts about nonphysical properties. However, if there are no facts about nonphysical properties, then knowing all facts means Mary would have know all physical facts. If Mary knew all physical facts about colours, this means she knew all of the true facts about colours and if physicalism were to be true, the knowledge of all physical things would be the exact same thing as complete knowledge simpliciter, since there is nothing over and above that of the physical. In other words, if there were something to have knowledge of that were over and above the physical, then there would have to be something over and above the physical, which is precisely what physicalism denies. According to Jackson, Mary could learn all the physical facts about colour but then experience colour itself, so it is plausible to say that she had learnt something when she sees red the first time. This means there must have been some knowledge she did not hold, but if she had all the physical knowledge whilst in the room, and there are still things that she did not know, we must conclude that she lacks knowledge of nonphysical properties. This leads to 3, where it can be concluded that not all things are physical so physicalism must be