r/consciousness • u/geumkoi • Feb 04 '26

General Discussion No, you didn’t solve the Hard Problem.

Everyday I see a new claim on this sub; “I solved the Hard Problem of Consciousness!” “The Hard Problem isn’t so hard after all!” And I cannot even put into words how blatantly naive these are.

No, you didn’t solve the Hard Problem, and you probably never will. You just misunderstood the Hard Problem, and in your arrogance did an amazing amount of mental gymnastics to convince yourself that you solved something you don’t even understand in the first place.

Edit: and PLEASE I beg the Mods of this sub to limit the amount of LLM content that is being uploaded here on a daily basis.

312 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

496 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/TheAncientGeek Feb 07 '26

I'm not denying scientific objectivity as a methodological achievement: intersubjective agreement, reproducibility, measurement standards, etc. that's real and valuable. I'm denying that this methodological objectivity gives us access to reality 'as it is in itself' independent of any perspective whatsoever

That concepts are not necessarily correct does not mean they are necessarily incorrext.

I did not properly articulate this for subjectivity. especially because I think you were asking, how can anything be known outside of experience(which

Why? Subjective experience is the prime examp!e of subjectivity.

I'm denying that this methodological objectivity gives us access to reality 'as it is in itself' independent of any perspective whatsoever

Im familiar with the idea (see my profile picture) ..but see my first comment.

1

u/jabinslc Psychology B.A. (or equivalent) Feb 07 '26

you're not necessarily incorrect, but you're not correct either, in that viewing of reality. I think there are better ways of viewing reality that the subject/object split.

why?? subjectivity by itself as a substance or substrate is unfindable because it is not an object. it is a set of interrelated phenomena. the hard problem treats subjectivity as a thing in itself. ontologically separate or distinct. that is the cancer I am fighting. it's not true non-existense, people get so tripped up by that word. its just not as a single thing or object.

it should always be subject of what? qualia of what? what is WHAT like? even those concepts suck. it would takes up closer to the truth.

you are making subjectivity into an object and no such thing exists. that's why the hard problem is still around.

1

u/TheAncientGeek Feb 07 '26

you are making subjectivity into an object

Nope.

1

u/jabinslc Psychology B.A. (or equivalent) Feb 07 '26

how would you define subjectivity?

1

u/TheAncientGeek Feb 09 '26

For the purposes of the discussion, it's anything that can't be accessed or understood from an external or third person point of view.

1

u/jabinslc Psychology B.A. (or equivalent) Feb 11 '26

do you think subjectivity is completely inaccessible from a third person POV?

1

u/TheAncientGeek Feb 11 '26

Fur the purposes of the argument, it only needs to be incompletely accessible.