Note that my fundamental premise is not, “I think the zombie world is coherently conceivable.” Nothing of interest follows from the fact that I have an opinion, since the opinion might be baseless (as you’ve repeatedly pointed out). Instead, my basic premise is that the zombie world is coherently conceivable (i.e. without the sort of finger-hand misunderstanding that might make a scenario seem conceivable when in fact it’s incoherent). You haven’t said a word that bears on the truth of this premise. All you’ve said is that ignorance might lead one to believe it even if it were false. But that is no reason to think that it is false.
...
Please explain what it means for something to be genuinely conceivable, as opposed to just being conceivable to some particular person.
I’m not sure how I’m supposed to react to this paragraph, frankly. I mean, suppose someone came to me and said: “There are Martians in my nose, therefore extraterrestrial life exists” and I said “Why do you believe there are Martians in your nose?” and he said, “No, I’m not reasoning from my belief that there are Martians in my nose—nothing follows from this, as a belief could be mistaken—I’m reasoning from the fact that there are Martians in my nose.”
Richard sez:
...
Please explain what it means for something to be genuinely conceivable, as opposed to just being conceivable to some particular person.
I’m not sure how I’m supposed to react to this paragraph, frankly. I mean, suppose someone came to me and said: “There are Martians in my nose, therefore extraterrestrial life exists” and I said “Why do you believe there are Martians in your nose?” and he said, “No, I’m not reasoning from my belief that there are Martians in my nose—nothing follows from this, as a belief could be mistaken—I’m reasoning from the fact that there are Martians in my nose.”
I mean, how is this not 100% pure naive realism?