This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

is Dr. Popovic himself a reductive materialist, or a materialist at all?

Tribesmen see an LED. They have no clue what transition metals are, what diodes are, what photons are, what a catode is. Yet, when the LED shines red, they say "the liver is red", when it shines blue, "the liver is blue". They think that LED is the thing purifying their bodies of all toxins, so they call it liver. Nonetheless, they are still correctly talking about LED states. — Lionino

Are you claiming that exchanging meaningful information about LED lights entails exchanging meaningful information about transition metals and photons and everything else that an LED is? Suppose two children are talking about how bright the sun is. Is your claim that they are also talking about photons and fusion and just don't know it?

Also, the photons the cavemen are seeing being emitted from the LED's (and causing their erroneous beliefs about the LED's) are not identical to the LED's themselves, in the way that brain states are supposedly identical to mental states.

Also, in your example, the tribesman have an erroneous belief LED's and livers. The children in my example don't have erroneous beliefs about their mental states (or what's causing them, since they have no beliefs about brains at all). Can you give an example where no erroneous beliefs are going on?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Are you claiming that exchanging meaningful information about LED lights entails exchanging meaningful information about transition metals and photons and everything else that an LED is?
— RogueAI

No, I am claiming one is a collection of facts Y about the LED and the other a collection of facts X, you don't need X for Y neither Y for X, even though X would give you a deeper understanding of Y. — Lionino

But you are claiming that exchanging meaningful information about mental states entails exchanging meaningful information about brain states. Why aren't the facts about the mental states collection of facts Y and the facts about the brain states collections of facts X?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

1. Mental states are identical to brain states.
2. From (1), talk of mental states is the same as talk of brain states.
3. Ancient peoples coherently talked about their mental states.
4. Ancient peoples did not coherently talk about their brain states.
5. Therefore, mental states are not identical to brain states. — RogueAI

Is the logic what you wish to discuss or do you wish to discuss whether brain states are "identical" to mental states.?

The logic is at least flawed prima facie. And if brain states are not "identical" to mental states for all (including the Ancient Greeks), then brain states are not "identical" to mental states.

Please advise.

"Identical" is a strange wording that's prone to confusion due to different people's understanding of what that exactly entails. That's why most philosophers talk in terms of supervenience instead.

Identical" is a strange wording that's prone to confusion due to different people's understanding of what that exactly entails. That's why most philosophers talk in terms of supervenience instead. — flannel jesus

I agree.

1. Mental states are identical to brain states. — RogueAI

Are they? And does it matter to your argument? You seem to be suggesting that the Ancient Greeks did not have brain states because they did not talk about them. And if they did have them but not talk about them, why would the "identical" relationship between brain states and mental states be any different for Ancient Greeks than for others?