The Question of Qualia & Community Consciousness

What is red? Is it merely a common agreement of the lower end of the magnetic spectrum? Or Is it the colorful essence of heat, the succulent taste of a strawberry, the representation of anger? Who is to say? While the conceptualization of sensory input is based on science, our individual experiences of touch, taste, smell, sight, and sound are subjective. The dualism between the physical world and our sensory experiences elicit emotions is known as qualia. Qualia are ineffable – there is no known language to transfer the perceptions of our minds to one another. We can observe physical states and behavior, but we cannot explain conscious experience itself, this is known as the explanatory gap. You may ask, how can a brain experience something that the brain is not? The questions continue today. 

The difficulty here goes beyond merely understanding the physiological functions of how vision functions or how our tongue transmits flavor information to the brain. Philosopher James Williams, prompts the question, “If science cannot fully explain qualia, then does it follow that science can only offer us a partial understanding of the universe?” (Williams, 1884). Though such examination may first appear arbitrary, qualia matter for our interpretation of the world. More importantly, an in-depth exploration of the phenomena reveals how community and mutual understandings may not exist to the extent we think. Does humanity really understand one another? While senses like music allow for communal bonding, in terms of our perception, we are all alone in our minds because language does not have a way to express the sensory information we experience therefore, we may all be experiencing the world differently without knowing since we lack a way to communicate it. That being said, senses still allow for relatability, relationship building, and the establishment of memories. 

Qualia are everything, they establish our human experience in the world and are a key component of our consciousness. They allow us to comprehend the world and how we fit into it as individuals. Some philosophers contend that qualia are a necessary element of consciousness and that we couldn’t perceive anything at all without them. Descartes conceived and popularized the notion that “I am in here and the world is out there because I am separate from the world” (Descartes, 1984). Consequently, qualia are crucial in the decision-making process. Depending on the situation, the smell of smoke can elicit a range of emotions and behavioral responses. For instance, one might experience happiness and calmness if they smell smoke when in a forest as it might be the smell of a campfire. On the other hand, if someone is inside and smells smoke, they could become frightened or because it might be a sign of a fire, shifting into panic mode. Qualia are directly linked to emotional output and therefore,  how we react to our surroundings. The sensations we subjectively perceive bridge the physical and mental worlds. They influence our perception of and interactions with our surroundings, and ultimately how we live our lives. That being said, according to Dr. Sanjay Gupta, “You can’t know what the qualia are like for anybody else other than yourself” (Gupta, 2022). Our engagement with qualia is different and may offer a divide in humanity. Though the physical world may be uniform, the perception of someone with synesthesia differs from someone who is colorblind. Further, the “hard problem of consciousness,” is the challenge of how and why humans even have subjective experiences. If we lack the language to compare our experiences, how can we be sure of collective consciousness? The answer: we are all individuals in our own minds. 

Qualia are individually unique and encapsulate personal history and the social milieu inhabited. Does mint ice cream taste the same to two different people? Undoubtedly, they may evoke different feelings in two people depending on the cultural context they were exposed to. One person might associate mint ice cream with joyous, refreshing, and palatable childhood memories. On the other hand, someone else may consume the same dessert and perceive it as superficial, spicy, reminiscent of times with an estranged family member. The pair can try their best to describe the sensations that arise but will never be able to experience their counterpart’s complete perception. Qualia are more individualized than collective as a result of social conditioning due to the influence of culture, personal perspectives, and social messages on how we perceive reality. Each person’s understanding of the world is unique because they bring their own biases and values into every experience they have – this makes it impossible to communicate if the same sensory experience is occurring. Thus, while there may be some general trends in how people perceive certain things overall qualia remain an intensely personal phenomenon. 

While we may not experience things the same, individual perception seems to excite shared themes, moods, and attitudes. Whether or not we truly perceive them to be the same in our minds, in communities people tend to agree on the emotionally elicited responses to colors, smells, sights, etc. That being said, depending on societal norms, the uptake of qualia may differ. Individuals will have various responses to the same color. We are influenced by colors in a variety of ways. Socially and culturally we are conditioned. Depending on where you are, you might choose to attend a funeral in black or white, two opposing hues (Kaur, 2020). Therefore one may associate black with solemnity while the other sees white in the same melancholic vein. It has been demonstrated in multiple studies that certain emotions are strongly correlated with particular colors, independent of age, sex, culture, or nationality. Yet, the 1968  study by Choungourian found that feelings evoked by colors vary depending on their culture. The qualia we experience are subjective and related to our place in a community environment. At the same time, the subjectivity of it all more impactfully reveals how sensory experiences are more individualized and independent than collective. 

While many argue for the importance of qualia, Philosopher and cognitive scientist, Daniel Dennet denies qualia even exist. In his work, “Quining Qualia”, he claims the experiences we have are grounded in our attitudes, not sensory experiences (Dennet, 1988). The basis for his assertion is founded on the idea that qualia change throughout our lifetime so we can’t be sure of one solid perception. He provides the example of detesting broccoli as a child and then enjoying it as an adult. Contrary to popular belief, Dennett does not reject the possibility of consciousness. Dennett only dismisses a particular type of subjective perception. He specifically rejects the enigmatic nature of qualia and favors a materialist approach. Dennett uses arguments from neuroscience and cognitive science to argue that qualia can be reduced to the activity of the visual cortex and other brain regions, not personal experience. The materialist perspective should be criticized for its failure to account for the subjective nature of consciousness. The perspective held by Dennet viewed consciousness as a mere physical process, and thus fails to explain how the subjectivity of emotions, sensations, and thoughts often originate from physical states. Dennet’s materialistic approach lacks an explanation for why certain qualia are experienced in a particular way. For example, why do people cry at “All Too Well” by Taylor Swift, or why the smell of rain reminds one of a certain person? Overall, the materialist perspective on qualia is limited in its ability to explain the complex range of human experiences. Dennet’s argument fails to account for why certain experiences evoke particular feelings in us, or why people have different reactions to similar stimuli. It cannot explain the relationship between physical stimulus and psychological response as it does emotion, memory, or personality into account. Finally, the materialist perspective ignores the fact that consciousness is much more complex than simply being objective matter in the world. 

Consciousness involves the dynamic process and interplay of thoughts and feelings with the physical world. Without subjectivity, there is no way to have complete knowledge and emotionality. Whether individually distinct or broadly accepted, the lack of complete comprehension over the issue suggests a triumph of personal perspectives. Materialism, grounded in science fails to account for the nuances in people’s minds. While there may be a singular objective reality that can be observed, the same cannot be said for the minds of you or I. Consequently, in refutation of Dennet, the materialist perspective lacks subjectivity when respective views are most crucial to understanding one’s place in the world, certain settings, and how we perceive ourselves.

The main difficulty in answering questions related to qualia, and therefore human consciousness comes down to the explanatory gap. Imagine trying to explain color to someone who has been blind their entire life, no matter how disruptive you may be, they will never see the color and fully conceptualize what “red” means. Such chasms emanate from the separation of physicality versus perception. Our mental perceptions cannot be observed nor explained completely, they are private which makes it impossible to bridge this explanatory gap without making assumptions about our subjective experiences that may be incongruent with others. Therefore, we can never truly know if our perceptions are truly the same or different from those of others. We must recognize our individual world experience as substantially more poignant than so-called collective understandings. In truth, there is little collective understanding instead, there is communal ignorance, framed as shared comprehension. Take, for example, the pop culture phenomenon of “The Dress”. In 2015, The Dress became a viral sensation. Viewers were divided on whether the dress depicted in a photograph was black and blue or white and gold. The phenomenon revealed differences in human color perception. Although the physical dress was eventually revealed to be blue and black, arguments circled the internet on the hue of the fabric. One can try to imagine a black and blue dress and can’t fully understand what it’s like to see that very dress as a black and blue (Yglesias, 2015). Perception is individualized and merely framed as communal. The sensational image demonstrates how individual perceptions of color can differ despite objectivity. Even though the majority of people saw the dress as either white and gold or black and blue, some saw it as another color entirely. This also shows how perception is framed as communal since everyone was discussing what they thought the colors were, even though their opinions differed. Groups formed in accordance to colors viewed, and arguments over whose perception was “correct” ensued. The dress is a prime example of how subjectivity trumps materialism in terms of advancing communication as well as personal opinion and experience.

However, Some believe that the notion of subjectivity is an invention. Those who proliferate this view are supporters of the mind-object identity hypothesis (MOI). Philosopher, psychologist, and AI expert, Riccardo Manzotti is a staunch proponent of the mind object identity hypothesis (Manzotti, 2023). He asserts There is no problem of consciousness at all and that human perception is entirely physical. Manzotti argues qualia and therefore, consciousness is a product of naïvity. Such assertion can easily be refuted by studies showing that certain colors are associated with positive feelings while others are associated with negative feelings. While I disagree with aspects of Manzotti’s MOI, I strongly agree with the sentiment that different people have varied perceptions of the same object. A prime example of both previous points is illustrated through an exploration of Baker-Miller Pink. The bubblegum-esque color has gone on to cover prison cells. As a result of primary studies, the color was believed to mitigate prisoner aggression. However, later studies show the calming effect only lasts for 15-30 minutes. (Gilliam & Unruh, 1988). Nevertheless, the color is associated with emotionality not just its objective physicality. Overall, while qualia alone does not necessarily lead to consciousness it is one component of the complex system of human experience. Even if things may not be physically different, our subjective experiences of them allow for differentiation in our own minds

First, the MOI hypothesis assumes that mental experiences are objective, and does not account for the subjective perception of reality. MOI also fails to explain how consciousness works in relation to qualia. The hypothesis does not provide any explanation as to why certain experiences evoke particular feelings in us, or why we have different reactions to similar stimuli. It fails to take into account factors such as emotion, memory, or personality which all contribute to our individual reactions. Finally, MOI ignores the fact that consciousness is much more complex than objectivity. Consciousness is a dynamic process that involves constantly evolving perceptions. Therefore, MOI fails to fully capture the complexity of consciousness and qualia. 

It is impossible to form one single collective understanding that is universally accepted and understood by all individuals. Each person’s individual subjective experience concerning qualia and sensory uptake will have an impact on how they interpret and understand themselves and the environment. Even if a group of people comes to a consensus on what they believe to be true about these concepts, their individual subjective experiences may still lead them to different conclusions or interpretations. Overall, individual subjectivity supersedes collective understanding

We may not be able to answer the hard question of consciousness, but this does not mean that we cannot strive for a better understanding of qualia and its implications for our lives. Even though the answer to this question may remain elusive, it is relatively clear that the human experience of qualia is subjective though the physical world may not be. Overall, a lack of ability to answer the hard question of consciousness does not negate the fact that qualia reinforce social milieu and subjective individuality.  The privatization and ineffability of qualia are concrete demonstrations that we are separated from humanity in our own perspectives. Is my blue the same blue you have been socially constructed to call “blue”? We may not have the answer, but we do know what we don’t know: truly communal comprehension.