It’s a neat analogy, but I wish you would have tried to give some arguments for the claims you made about qualia, even just explicit references to existing arguments.
I don’t know why you think that the set of qualia should be finite or that qualia depend only on themselves.
Only set of possible letters is finite. I think that set of possible colors can be infinite.
Any syllogism which ends with something red, must have something red in its premises. Thus, redness itself can’t be proved in any conclusion. Thus it depends only on itself. The mathematical objects which depends only on themselves are axioms. We can postulate the existence of class “colors” and object red in it.
It’s a neat analogy, but I wish you would have tried to give some arguments for the claims you made about qualia, even just explicit references to existing arguments.
I don’t know why you think that the set of qualia should be finite or that qualia depend only on themselves.
After I put this on twitter, I was linked to an article which has the same argument with many details: https://www.academia.edu/22474275/Squalia_Qualia_like_Properties_of_Symbolic_Systems
Only set of possible letters is finite. I think that set of possible colors can be infinite.
Any syllogism which ends with something red, must have something red in its premises. Thus, redness itself can’t be proved in any conclusion. Thus it depends only on itself. The mathematical objects which depends only on themselves are axioms. We can postulate the existence of class “colors” and object red in it.