r, physicalism is not threatened merely by the fact Mary learns something. The factor disproving physicalism is the fact Mary learns something new about the object that is red. For example she can see a tomato is now read. Her teachings showed her all physical attributes to the tomato and she would know everything about it. The problem is that she had no idea what red was until she saw red, therefore she did not know everything physical about the tomato. If physicalism were true, Mary would have known exactly what the red tomato looked like before she saw it, including the redness it displayed.After reading the Jackson article I have concluded that I agree with the points being made against physicalism. The example that I believe disproves physicalism is trying to explain a color or taste to someone who lacks the sense to experience them. A person may know everything about how a color is perceived and what frequency the light is that produces a color such as orange. Now if this person says everything they know about orange to a person who is blind, how could they possibly know what orange looks like. It would be entirely impossible for a blind person to see orange, even though they know all physical properties. If you even just imagine how you would explain a color, you can not think of how to explain what it may be like to perceive that color.In conclusion, even though we live in a primarily physical world, physical knowledge does not explain everything. It is necessary to have experiences to have a complete knowledge. All of the physical knowledge possible does not explain everything in this world. This is the reason physicalism cannot be a complete explanation of the human mind. ...
