Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

835

Yes
No
Two more weeks!
Fuck You!

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (21).
[–] • 0 pt

You can't put it anywhere on the diagram! That means it's just the whole thing.

[–] • 0 pt

EXACTLY!

So you get why the title was funny, then?

Because not only can you not make a robot that feels pain, you can't make a human that feels pain, because pain doesn't exist (eliminativist).

Or, you do what Chiro just said, make it the "whole thing". Where, when Dennett says he or others or soldiers are in pain, it refers to the process in this diagram.

But if you are reductionist now, then you can make a computer that feels pain.

[–] • 0 pt

Hahaha. The old 'mood' function. Classic.

[–] • 0 pt

So...

Either: a) pain is a top level node in this diagram, or b) pain can not be a top-level node in this diagram.

So we ask what "pain" is. And we say things like, maybe it has something to do with reacting uncomfortably, or fear, or stress, or this chemical release, or that brain process, or that desire created or thwarted, of that uncomfortably memory had.

And we say, okay, so whatever "pain" is, it is associated with {a, b, c, ..., x, y, z}. And we can not think of anything else to put into that set, because we just exhausted the exercise.

So, it has been revealed that (((pain))) is no where to be found as a top-level part in the diagram. Let's call this PainL. Heh.

Then yeah. If you think PainL is no where on this diagram, but it is something not satisfied by anything in the process diagram with you. Then you know what, you can't make a computer that feels PainL.

But you know what else? I would then be a PainL eliminativist. Because I don't think PainL exists. I don't think any human has PainL. I don't think PainL is a coherent concept. Etcetera. I think it is stupid to speak of pain in terms of PainL.

Okay.

So you make the reductionist move. And you say, fine fine, pain is not a top-level node. Pain is just the process described in this diagram.

Let's call that PainM.

Then yes, you can make computers that feel PainM, obviously. And what it means for a human to be in pain is PainM. And no I'm not a PainM eliminativist. And yes I am a PainM reductionist. Yes I, people, soldiers, feel PainM.