Dissolving the “dissolving”. The idea of p-zombies, as well as many other philosophical ideas (like consciousness), is based on a combination of many similar but eventually different ideas. “Dissolving” here is in fact creating a list of all subtypes. Another type of “dissolving” would be complete elimination of the idea, but in this case we just lose a descriptive instrument and get a feeling of an absent tooth on its place, which will be eventually replaced with some ad hoc constructions, like: “yes, we dissolved the idea of X, but as we still need to speak about something like X, we will continue to say “X”, but must remember that X is actually dissolved.”
I tried also to dissolve p-zombies by creating a classification of many possible (imaginable) types of p-zombies here.
“Dissolving” here is in fact creating a list of all subtypes.
I don’t think that is a sufficient criterion for dissolution. The subtypes of a problem can still be problems. If there are N subtypes, there could be N problems.
Dissolving the “dissolving”. The idea of p-zombies, as well as many other philosophical ideas (like consciousness), is based on a combination of many similar but eventually different ideas. “Dissolving” here is in fact creating a list of all subtypes. Another type of “dissolving” would be complete elimination of the idea, but in this case we just lose a descriptive instrument and get a feeling of an absent tooth on its place, which will be eventually replaced with some ad hoc constructions, like: “yes, we dissolved the idea of X, but as we still need to speak about something like X, we will continue to say “X”, but must remember that X is actually dissolved.”
I tried also to dissolve p-zombies by creating a classification of many possible (imaginable) types of p-zombies here.
Good work with the chart. That would have taken a lot of effort!
I don’t think that is a sufficient criterion for dissolution. The subtypes of a problem can still be problems. If there are N subtypes, there could be N problems.