Well, sorta, but it’s not the pattern you’re thinking of. The pattern which defines experiential states includes the causal history of the mechanism that is doing the processing and the causal history of the input to the mechanism. If you just looked at the physical attributes of the mechanism and its states you would not have enough information to say if it was an experience or not.
Yes, but it may not be enough to observe that input x produces output y. You need to know why the Mechanism was set up to produce that output in response to that input. And you need to know that, because that is how the subject will reference that experience. When asked, the subject won’t refer to x or y. The subject will refer to “tiger” or “hide”.But you can only predict an experience based on observation of physical correlation. It's the physical processes we can predict, and then attach the correlated experiential outcome to.
Sure it does, if it explains how an experience is a physical process that happens to a subject and that subject includes a mechanism to reference that process.This is because, as I said, we have a physical model of how the world works. Stuff and forces. A model which encompasses reduction in one direction, and how physical processes can result in 'emergent' new properties. But there is no place in that model for experience, it doesn't address experience at all.
How about ... an experience is a process whereinThere is no list of its [the experience’s] component parts, no laws of experience.
Part 1: a Mechanism, which has been organized to respond to x by outputting y, actually responds to
Part 2: input x by generating
Part 3. output y
and wherein input x constitutes a symbolic sign and
output y constitutes a valuable response with respect to the meaning associated with the symbolic sign.
Consider me leapt.So it's a leap to extrapolate that experience is reducible or emergent.
I believe the link/bridging law you’re looking for involves the relation between the purpose built into the mechanism and the meaning of the symbolic sign.We can say this is how the physical universe works , and experience correlates with certain physical processes, but we're missing the link, perhaps some bridging law, or more fundamental model which includes both the physical and experiential.