Therefore Mary’s incomplete knowledge about consciousness doesn’t have metaphysical implications, because it is incomplete in fundamentally same way.
No it isn’t. Mary doesn’t know what Red looks like. That’s not know-how
Mary doesn’t know how to ride, and therefore has incomplete understanding of riding. What’s the difference?
Things can be incomplete in different ways
Both need instantiation for what?
For gaining potential utility from specific knowledge representations, for knowledge that feels intuitively complete.
Theoretical knowledge isn’t about utility.
I mean all of them: if physicalism explains riding a bike
It doesn’t , in the sense that the theoretical knowledge gives you the know-how. That’s one of your own assumptions.
No it isn’t. Mary doesn’t know what Red looks like. That’s not know-how
Things can be incomplete in different ways
Theoretical knowledge isn’t about utility.
It doesn’t , in the sense that the theoretical knowledge gives you the know-how. That’s one of your own assumptions.