Explain What Is The "Hard Problem" Of Consciousness

Explain what is the "hard problem" of consciousness according to Chalmers, and discuss it using Frank Jackson's case of Mary in the black and white room

Determine whether you agree with Chalmers that Mary does not know something in the room, and whether the hard problem of consciousness remains even if the easy problem is solved. Use proper citations for your sources.

Paper For Above instruction

David Chalmers’ formulation of the "hard problem" of consciousness has significantly influenced philosophical and scientific debates about the nature of subjective experience. While the "easy problems" of consciousness—such as explaining brain functions and neuronal processes—are regarded as tractable through empirical means, the hard problem centers on understanding why and how physical processes give rise to subjective experiences, known as qualia. The contrast emphasizes a profound gap in explaining subjective consciousness solely through neuroscience and physical science. This paper explores Chalmers’ concept of the hard problem, utilizing Frank Jackson’s famous thought experiment about Mary in the black-and-white room, to analyze whether she gains new knowledge upon experiencing color and whether the hard problem persists even if the easy problem is addressed.

The Hard Problem of Consciousness According to Chalmers

Chalmers (1995) articulates the hard problem of consciousness as the challenge of explaining why physical processes in the brain are accompanied by subjective experience. Unlike the easy problems, which can be addressed by neuroscience and computational theories, the hard problem questions the very nature of experience: why does a particular brain state produce a subjective feeling, or qualia? For example, why does the experience of red or pain feel a certain way internally, as opposed to being merely observable behavior or neural activity? Chalmers argues that the difficulty arises because physical explanations do not inherently account for the subjective, first-person perspective that characterizes conscious experience. This persistent explanatory gap leads many philosophers and scientists to posit that consciousness may be a fundamental property, akin to space or mass, requiring new physics or metaphysics for full understanding (Chalmers, 1995).

Frank Jackson’s Mary and the Knowledge Argument

Frank Jackson’s thought experiment about Mary, a neuroscientist confined in a black-and-white room, provides a vivid illustration of the epistemic distinction involved in understanding consciousness (Jackson, 1982). Mary has comprehensive physical knowledge about color perception: neural mechanisms, wavelengths, and the science of vision. Despite her exhaustive scientific knowledge, she has never experienced color firsthand. When Mary leaves the room and sees a red apple, she gains new, non-physical knowledge—what it is like to see red. Jackson argues that this demonstrates there are facts about consciousness—qualia—that are not captured by physical explanations alone. The knowledge argument thus suggests that physical theories cannot fully account for the subjective nature of experience, supporting Chalmers’ claim that the hard problem remains unresolved.

Are There Still Unknowns in Mary’s Experience?

I align with Jackson’s conclusion that Mary’s post-experience realization reveals her prior incomplete knowledge, emphasizing that there are aspects of consciousness that elude purely physical explanations. This supports Chalmers’ view that the hard problem remains because no amount of scientific progress on the easy problems—explaining neural correlates and cognitive processes—can fully elucidate subjective experience. The fact that Mary learns something new upon perceiving color suggests that physical accounts do not suffice to explain qualia, underscoring the necessity for a different conceptual framework. Thus, even if we solve the easy problems, the hard problem persists because it pertains to a different level of explanation: that of conscious experience itself.

Conclusion

Chalmers’ hard problem underscores a fundamental challenge in understanding the nature of consciousness: explaining why physical processes give rise to subjective experience. Jackson’s thought experiment about Mary supports this view by illustrating that physical knowledge alone does not encompass the entirety of conscious experience. I believe the hard problem does indeed remain beyond the scope of current scientific explanation because it involves the intrinsic qualities of experience, which cannot be reduced solely to neural mechanisms. Addressing the easy problems is essential but insufficient; a comprehensive theory of consciousness must also encompass the subjective aspect that eludes purely physical accounts.

References

  • Chalmers, D. (1995). Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(3), 200-219.
  • Jackson, F.. (1982). Epiphenomenal Qualia. The Philosophical Quarterly, 32(127), 127-136.
  • Block, N. (1995). On a confusion about the function of consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18(2), 227-247.
  • Lycan, W. G. (1996). The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mind. Oxford University Press.
  • Nagel, T. (1974). What Is It Like to Be a Bat? The Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435-450.
  • Levine, J. (1993). Materialism and Qualia. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 74(1), 1-20.
  • Glock, H. (2001). What is the Qualia Problem? In H. Glock (Ed.), The Nature of Consciousness. Oxford University Press.
  • Searle, J. (1980). Minds, Brains, and Programs. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), 417-457.
  • Seager, W. (2006). The Symbiosis of Science and Philosophy: The Hard Problem. Philosophy Now, (78), 44-47.
  • Chalmers, D. (2010). The Character of Consciousness. Oxford University Press.

Related Assignments