Addition to my last post: my feelings on this particular issue (the mind-body problem, the soul, experience, or however you want to cast it) are pretty close to Hofstadter's as outlined in I Am A Strange Loop, which is a great read no matter what your stance on the issue (he doesn't take a strong stance either way, but pretty clearly indicates that he thinks it's the computation that's important, not the substrate).
I think there's something very special about perception, and it's a very deep, tricky, and important matter that we don't really understand well enough yet; however, I am agnostic towards any metaphysical details. Even if they do exist (I personally don't think there's any evidence for that anyhow, but...), I don't think there's anything much worth say about them because they are not open to investigation.
If you're agnostic regarding the metaphysical details then you're not a materialist. Materialism is a strong metaphysical position, not a form of agnosticism.
Comments
Addition to my last post: my feelings on this particular issue (the mind-body problem, the soul, experience, or however you want to cast it) are pretty close to Hofstadter's as outlined in I Am A Strange Loop, which is a great read no matter what your stance on the issue (he doesn't take a strong stance either way, but pretty clearly indicates that he thinks it's the computation that's important, not the substrate).
I think there's something very special about perception, and it's a very deep, tricky, and important matter that we don't really understand well enough yet; however, I am agnostic towards any metaphysical details. Even if they do exist (I personally don't think there's any evidence for that anyhow, but...), I don't think there's anything much worth say about them because they are not open to investigation.
If you're agnostic regarding the metaphysical details then you're not a materialist. Materialism is a strong metaphysical position, not a form of agnosticism.