My lords, my ladies, and everyone: Qualia! Singular: quale. Individual, subjective qualities or properties of conscious experiences. They are the raw, qualitative aspects of our sensory perceptions, thoughts, and feelings.‘’Qualia’’ are often described as the “what it’s like” aspect of an experience, as they capture the subjective character of how something feels, looks, tastes, or sounds from a first-person perspective. For example, the redness of a rose, the taste of chocolate, the feeling of warmth from the sun, or the pain of a headache — all these have specific qualia associated with them. These qualia are difficult to convey to others because they are inherently subjective and tied to personal experience. In this sense, we can say that the ‘’qualities’’ of something (and even the ‘’quality’’), are established based on the “qualia” felt by someone. A rose “it is” and it is complete. What a rose “it it’s like” involves mediation by a holder of “Qualia.” So, what is exactly “Qualia,” and why announce it with the trumpet? Pronounced “kwah-lee-uh,” it is the plural form of “quale.” These are the unique, subjective qualities that define our conscious experiences. The richness of our sensory encounters, the nuances of our feelings. The intensity and the felt speed, the heaviness or the texture of our thoughts. These are what make the sweetness of honey and the warmth of sunlight. Not the bees and not the Sun!

The value of Subjectivity

What sets qualia apart from all the human concepts we use daily, is their inescapable subjectivity. They are known only to the experiencer, and it is impossible to convey the full depth of one’s qualia to another person. Of course, there are writers, movie makers, dancers, painters, artists, and thinkers who somehow feed us with translations of qualia. But while they can offer descriptions, comparisons, and metaphors, the true essence of the experience remains locked within your subjective world. Everything we perceive and feel, from the beauty of a sunset to the taste of our favorite dessert, is inherently subjective. The good news is that if we connect to subjectivity, this becomes perhaps the most intimate dimension in which one can exist. How accurate or how distorted subjectivity can become is the bad news and is certainly a broad discussion in itself.The profound challenge of subjectivity lies in its resistance to easy communication. It’s a barrier that separates the inner world of one’s experiences from the external world that others perceive. This divide is what makes conveying the full depth of one’s qualia to another person an insurmountable task. Just imagine trying to describe the feeling of a particular nuance of emotion to someone who has never experienced it; or explaining to an another, the vividness of a particular dream.

The Connection to Consciousness

The link between qualia and consciousness lies precisely! in this shared territory of subjectivity. Some theories suggest that consciousness emerges from the complex interactions of simpler elements in the brain, like a symphony arising from the combination of certain individual musical notes. You push x and y buttons and voila! Consciousness occurs! Others explore the possibility of dualism, proposing that consciousness is a distinct, non-physical entity that interacts with the physical brain. This, therefore, becomes something not contained by us but something that passes through us, happens to us, and exists by itself. A conundrum, a kōan, a mystery that perhaps should remain a mystery. Consciousness, in its most basic form, is the state of being aware of and able to think and perceive one’s surroundings and/or condition. If we want to exaggerate a bit — and we want to, of course — we can say that subjectivity is, anyway, the fastest gate to consciousness.Qualia, on the other hand, are the vivid and personal aspects of this conscious awareness. Let me explain myself! Here’s how they are intertwined: Some philosophers argue that qualia serve as the fundamental building blocks of consciousness. They are the elements from which our conscious experiences are constructed. When you perceive a red rose, it is not just the concept of “red” or “rose” that makes up your experience, but the specific redness that you and only you perceive (I think you all know about “my red is not like your red”), and the unique quality of the rose’s appearance you perceive, the feelings you start feeling because of the scent of it, and the whole chemistry and state that it is birthed inside of you because you just got fully aware of the rose. It is tempting at this point to conclude that qualia are actually the whole experience of awareness itself; but let’s slow down and let’s think about it a little longer! While qualia are like the actors on the stage of consciousness, consciousness itself provides the theater. It is the overarching framework that allows qualia to exist and interact. Without consciousness, qualia would have no platform upon which to make their appearance. So, consciousness without qualia is possible — just think about zen masters. The other way around is not possible.

B

ut as we evolve in understanding, from qualia to consciousness, we encounter a fundamental challenge: explaining how physical processes in the brain give rise to the subjective qualities of qualia and the overarching awareness of consciousness. This is often referred to as the “hard problem” of consciousness, a question that continues to perplex philosophers, neuroscientists, and cognitive scientists. The “hard problem” of consciousness is a term coined by philosopher David Chalmers. It revolves around the question of ‘’how’’ and ‘’why’’ physical processes in the brain give rise to the subjective qualities of qualia and the overarching awareness of consciousness. This problem distinguishes itself from the “easy problems” of consciousness, which deal with more straightforward questions about cognitive functions and neural mechanisms.The heart of this issue lies in the stark contrast between the subjective domain of conscious experiences we just talked about and the objective domain of science. Because science, as we know it, relies on empirical observations and quantifiable data. Consciousness, however, is fundamentally subjective — we all know it is there, but it remains an inner world of thoughts, sensations, and emotions that cannot be quantified, let’s not say directly proven or measured.Just imagine trying to explain the exquisite taste of a ripe peach to someone who has never tasted one. You can use comparations, describe its juiciness, the burst of sweetness, and the fragrant aroma, but you can never fully convey the actual taste. This is the essence of the “hard problem” — the explanatory gap between the experience itself and the subjective qualities of the experience. While we can describe the physical processes that occur when we see an apple or feel the sun’s rays, we struggle to explain why these processes give rise to the actual experience of seeing red or feeling warmth. Science explains its mechanisms, yes, of course, in detail — ‘’why’’ and ‘’how’’ something happens — but “what it’s like,” not yet. Maybe because it holds zero functionality, but who knows. However, this challenge leads us next to question the limits of reductionism, the idea that complex phenomena can be fully explained by breaking them down into their constituent parts. And while reductionism has been a successful method in many scientific domains, consciousness may be one of those phenomena that resists complete reduction to physical components. Knowing how a clock works, its mechanics and what it is measuring can’t explain “what it’s like,” the passing time. So, there are parts of human life where reductionism falters, where it fumbles in the face of the profound depth of human subjective experience.

T

he Uniqueness of Experience: Reductionism often seeks to dissect complex phenomena into simpler, quantifiable elements. However, the richness and uniqueness of subjective experiences, such as the taste of a ripe peach or the feeling of love, cannot be fully captured by breaking them down into components. Each person’s qualia-driven experience is distinct and deeply personal, defying reductionist attempts to standardize or generalize.

The Experiential Gap: While reductionism can provide insight into the mechanisms and processes underlying certain phenomena, it struggles to bridge the experiential gap — the divide between objective descriptions and the actual lived experience. When we seek to explain “what it’s like,” reductionism falls short, leaving a profound disconnect between mechanistic understanding and subjective reality.

Human Connection: Recognizing the value of subjectivity is essential for fostering sophisticated empathy and basic understanding among individuals. By acknowledging that each person’s experience is uniquely shaped by their qualia, we become more empathetic and open to diverse perspectives. This acknowledgment is crucial for building smart and compassionate societies and nurturing meaningful relationships.

The Mystery of Consciousness: Consciousness, often intertwined with qualia, remains one of the most challenging puzzles in science and philosophy. The reductionist approach, which focuses on physical components and measurable data, often struggles to address the essence of conscious experience. It leaves unanswered questions about ‘’why’’ and ‘’how’’ physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective qualities. The other day, I stumbled upon a Neil deGrasse reel remarking: “Existence has no obligation to make sense to you” — And I absolutely loved it!!

Intrinsic beauty: They add layers of aesthetics, substance and depth to existence. But lords, ladies, and all, not lastly! As we bid adieu to this also poor-in-qualia cerebral text, remember that subjectivity and qualia, in themselves, are the sources of:

The Value of Depth and Meaning: Subjectivity adds richness and meaning to our lives. It encompasses the emotional resonance of our experiences, the aesthetics of art and culture, and 7.8 billion of nuances of human connections. A reductionist perspective, while valuable in many scientific contexts, risks overlooking the profound dimensions of existence that make life fulfilling and profound.