C: People keep talking about the “hard problem of consciousness” — why physical processes give rise to subjective experience. Even if we knew every detail about the brain, they say, we’d still be missing the “why.”
M: Let’s start simple: when you say “subjective experience,” do you mean something over and above what the brain is doing?
C: That’s the assumption — that there’s the brain’s processes plus a mysterious “what it’s like.”
M: Try this: why does H₂O produce “wetness”?
C: Wetness isn’t extra stuff. It’s just the way water interacts with us.
M: Exactly. “Wetness” is the inside perspective of a molecular interaction. Now imagine consciousness as the inside perspective of a different kind of process — not molecules sticking, but a system persistently modeling the boundary between itself and the world.
C: So the “what it’s like” is just what boundary maintenance feels like from the inside?
M: Yes. Every sensation, emotion, and perception is a change in that boundary state. Red is the inside-view of a certain perceptual update. Pain is the inside-view of a threat to the boundary. No extra “thing” is floating above the process — they are the same event.
C: Then the “why” disappears. There’s nothing to bridge.
M: Right. The so-called “hard problem” is just asking why a system that persistently models its boundary also has an inside view — but the inside view is the act of boundary maintenance. It’s like asking why a circle has an inside.
Mind Stuffing 