The existence of a verbal report of qualia is strong evidence that the reporter has subjective experience (or someone they’ve learned to report this way from having subjective experience). I’m not talking about specific emotional states being reported
But you agree there are nonverbal humans who nonetheless probably have qualia, right? If you think their species indicates their capacities then I think you should take phylogenetic relatedness more seriously as a reason to expect similar mental experiences.
I wasn’t talking about the specific emotional state either. I think this example here casts some doubt on the idea that verbal report is the principal or only way that we come to believe that other humans have qualia.
The existence of a verbal report of qualia is strong evidence that the reporter has subjective experience (or someone they’ve learned to report this way from having subjective experience). I’m not talking about specific emotional states being reported
But you agree there are nonverbal humans who nonetheless probably have qualia, right? If you think their species indicates their capacities then I think you should take phylogenetic relatedness more seriously as a reason to expect similar mental experiences.
I wasn’t talking about the specific emotional state either. I think this example here casts some doubt on the idea that verbal report is the principal or only way that we come to believe that other humans have qualia.