They both seem be be asking how neurological processes can give rise to consciousness. Is there a real difference between the two questions, or is one just a reformulation of the other?

  • 1
    As far as I understand, the hard problem simply identifies those aspects of consciousness, namely qualia, for which Chalmers claims we can never observe any sort of neural correlate. If this is correct, then the hard problem is simply Chalmers way of focusing the mind-body problem on those problems he believes to be insurmountable. – Nick Aug 8 '19 at 21:28
  • 1
    It's a variation, but I'd call it re-formulation of the old metaphysical problem. Some philosophers have hoped to rebrand it as a scientific problem but it remains stubbornly metaphysical. Category-errors breed like rabbits in this area of research. . – user20253 Aug 9 '19 at 15:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.