People don’t like epiphenomenalism per se, they feel they are forced into it by other claims they find compelling. Usually some combination of
Qualia exist in some sense
Qualia can’t be explained reductively
3.The physical world is causally closed.
In other words, 1 and 2 jointly imply that qualia are non physical, 3 means that physical explanations are sufficient, so non physical qualia must be causally idle.
The rationalist world doesn’t have a clear refutation of of the above. Some try to refute 1, the Dennett approach of qualia denial. Others try to refute 2, in ways that fall short of providing a reductive explanation of qualia. Or just get confused between solving the easy problem and the hard problem.
People don’t like epiphenomenalism per se, they feel they are forced into it by other claims they find compelling. Usually some combination of
Qualia exist in some sense
Qualia can’t be explained reductively
3.The physical world is causally closed.
In other words, 1 and 2 jointly imply that qualia are non physical, 3 means that physical explanations are sufficient, so non physical qualia must be causally idle.
The rationalist world doesn’t have a clear refutation of of the above. Some try to refute 1, the Dennett approach of qualia denial. Others try to refute 2, in ways that fall short of providing a reductive explanation of qualia. Or just get confused between solving the easy problem and the hard problem.