[BOUNTY] Create a piece of art for the Philosophical Thought Experiment 3: Mary's Room

Dear Community,

The Philosophers DAO is very glad of launching this artistic bounty. Philosophy is full of thought experiments, that are deeply important to argue for or against a certain thesis. We want to see NEAR community to express its creativity by creating art from philosophical thought experiments and thus learn a little bit about these experiments. This one tells us about philosophy of mind and epistemology. Let the philosophical thought experiment be your inspiration, and bring us your art!

We will give 100 usd in NEAR (according to conversion rate used for NEAR to pay the DAO), for the 4 best pieces of art. The pieces of art must not be minted, must be completely original (no copyright problem), because they are going to be minted by us, with the due credits, in our Mintbase store and with royalties and revenue splitted equally between the artist and The Philosophers DAO. In case the piece of art is not an image or gif, it must come with a cover image. We accept as pieces of art: images, including memes, gifs, GAN, videos, poetry, 3d objects; and they should express in a very creative way the following thought experiment:
The goal is to bring the academy more close to people and we think that art is the way for that. With that in mind, we want to produce a bounty in which the NEAR community can express its creativity by creating art from philosophical thought experiments.

Thought experiment: Mary’s room

The Mary’s room is a famous philosophical thought experiment proposed by Frank Jackson in 1982. The experiment describes Mary, as a scientist who lives in a black and white world where she has extensive access to physical descriptions of color, but no actual human perceptual experience of color. The central question of the thought experiment is whether Mary will obtain new knowledge when she goes outside the black and white world and experiences seeing in color.

The thought experiment was originally proposed as follows:

Mary is a brilliant scientist who is, for whatever reason, forced to investigate the world from a black and white room via a black and white television monitor. She specializes in the neurophysiology of vision and acquires, let us suppose, all the physical information there is to obtain about what goes on when we see ripe tomatoes, or the sky, and use terms like “red”, “blue”, and so on. She discovers, for example, just which wavelength combinations from the sky stimulate the retina, and exactly how this produces via the central nervous system the contraction of the vocal cords and expulsion of air from the lungs that results in the uttering of the sentence “The sky is blue”.

The big questions are: what will happen when Mary is released from her black and white room or is given a color television monitor? Will she learn anything or not?

Consultant: Jackson, Frank (1982). “Epiphenomenal Qualia”. Philosophical Quarterly. 32 (127): 127–136.

We will close this bounty August 30th, 2022, when The Philosophers DAO is going to choose the 4 best pieces of art.

Please, submit your art here, as a comment, together with your name, NEAR wallet, title of the work, and description of the piece.

Thank you all for participating.
Let’s bring philosophy to the blockchain through art!

This bounty is a continuation of:


Im excited participating to your bounty​:heart_eyes_cat:


essa é minha entrada. acredito que a primeira, pq tenho muito a falar sobre o tema. <3

e estou bem feliz de participar tb <3



Adorei sua arte! Também gostei do tema do bounty, bem instigante! :smiling_face_with_three_hearts: :heart_eyes: :star_struck:


brigada flor. Adoro esse lance de cor e me deixa acordada mts vezes


Poderia ser arte criada por i.A, tambem?

1 Like

Sim, se vc tiver autorizacao do programa para mintar. Por exemplo, Midjourney exige q vc tenha uma licenca.

1 Like

wooow adorei a Bounty, vou participar tbm \o/ vou desenvolver a arte e volto aqui com ela pronta :star_struck: :artist: :art:


Bom dia. Em anexo a obra desenvolvida para o bounty.

“Baque”. Mígsa, 2022.
Arte Digital.

Natan Alves
Nome artístico: Mígsa
Carteira: migsainu.near



Refleti aqui na proposta e fiquei pirando sobre aquele papo da “beleza estar nos olhos de quem vê”. Respondendo ao questionamento, penso que Mary vai ficar óbvia e preguiçosa quando receber as cores como elas são. Vai aprender algo, certamente. Mas como? Em preto e branco houve uma qualidade além da fisicalidade das coisas, um entendimento outro, uma ativação de diferentes sentidos já que ela pode experimentar as cores por outros acessos.

Então a partir daí produzi esta imagem. Bem clichê mesmo. A transição de cores representa esta mudança de quali, o olho aberto chama atenção pra a perda de atenção pelo fisicalidade. Ruídos, tv… :exploding_head:

Aprendi também sobre Fred e mais uma vez não sei se entendi tudo ou não entendi nada ahahahah. Enfim, gosto assim!



Every universe has its own laws of physics. The fact that we know all the physics rules of this universe and have all kinds of material knowledge does not mean that there are no different universes, physics rules and information sets other than our universe.
These universes may be the subject of metaphysics as they are not currently open to our reach and senses, but they can be imagined by individuals with intuitive brains and discussed by philosophers.
When the developments in technology and science allow, the reality of these speculations is confirmed and they cease to be the subject of metaphysics and philosophy and become the subject of physics and verified knowledge.
Perhaps at the core of this debate lies the question of whether there is a soul or whether there is a Creator and an afterlife. Because belief is not based on knowledge, it is the subject of metaphysics until its claims are confirmed by physics. But it can also remain the subject of metaphysics forever, because once it becomes the subject of physics, that belief will be replaced by another as yet unconfirmed belief, and this cycle can continue for a long time.
It is not true that the subjective perception of information gives different flavors to the information, so it is personal and cannot be included in the known set. A sufficiently advanced technology can model our brain down to the finest detail, allowing the individual to access all the perceptual information derivatives that may occur in others. Therefore, perceptual knowledge based on experience is also the subject of the laws of physics (cognitive science) rather than metaphysics.
However, this does not mean that physicalism is wrong. As our technological progress diverges to infinity, the amount of information we do not yet know will converge to 0. Both physicalists and their opponents (dualists?) are correct, and their theories are not mutually exclusive. The issue is related to the boundaries of the definition universe in which the completeness of knowledge is measured.
I couldn’t understand why, in physicalism, Mary had to have (premise) knowledge in and out of the universe of definition from the very beginning. Why would they claim such a thing? We can only know the information we are exposed to.


Near wallet: bazer08.near


Mary is a very intelligent scientist who was born and raised in a black and white room, was not exposed to any color other than black and white, and took lessons through black and white books and monitors. During her time in this room, Mary has become a renowned authority in the fields of physics, physiology, neurophysiology and has a thorough knowledge of neurophysiology. The scientists who trapped Mary in this room decided to take her out one day. When Mary goes out, the first thing to greet her is a red rose. Although he physically knew all the neural and physiological causes and functions of color vision, he learned something new when he saw red: what it was like to see red. This new information obtained - knowledge of the phenomenal quality - is about a new fact about the outside world. This phenomenon is what it’s like to see red. The reason Mary previously had complete physical information in her room but was unable to obtain relevant factual information, according to Jackson, is that the information she gained from her experience of seeing red was phenomenal. Phenomenal information can be obtained from phenomenal qualities and only in a subjective way.

Near wallet: stunter31.near

1 Like

Mary’s Room is a thought experiment that attempts to establish that there are non-physical properties and attainable knowledge that can be discovered only through conscious experience. It attempts to refute the theory that all knowledge is physical knowledge

Near. Wallet - eyesore.near


This thought experiment by Frank Jackson, about a scientist named Mary who lives in a black and white room, is sometimes called the “Knowledge Argument.” However, it is debatable whether this argument is about knowledge, that is, epistemic, or whether it is about existence, that is, metaphysical.
Jackson invites us to imagine the following scenario. In a future where we have complete physics and brain science, there lives a genius scientist named Mary. However, from the moment Mary was born, she grew up in a completely black and white room, never experiencing other colors. Through the black and white television in her room, Mary learned all the physical facts that can be known about color perception. She knows exactly which wavelengths all colors correspond to, how these waves stimulate our retina when they come into contact with our eyes, how this data is transmitted to the brain by nerves and how it is processed in the occipital lobe. One day Mary leaves her room and sees a red apple. So wouldn’t Mary have learned something new, namely how red looks?
But before Mary left the room, she knew all the physical facts to be known. When She left the room, she learned something new. So there are non-physical facts. In other words, physicalism is wrong.
How can physicalists answer this argument? One of the strategies adopted by physicalists is to say that the argument confuses two meanings of the word “know” and is therefore invalid. In epistemology we are usually concerned with the type of knowledge we call propositional knowledge. Propositions are roughly the meanings of sentences that claim something to be true. For example, the sentence “It is raining” expresses a proposition because it makes a claim about the world and may be true or false. However, “Can you bring me water?” and “Don’t step on the grass!” Such sentences do not express propositions.

In connection with this definition, we can understand propositional knowledge as knowing that a proposition is true. However, we don’t always use the word “know” in propositional contexts. For example, we say “He knows how to play the guitar” for someone who can play the guitar, and “He knows how to ride a bike” for someone who can ride a bike. The common point of these examples is that we are talking about a talent of the person mentioned in both of them.
Some physicalists use this distinction to defend physicalism against the Mary’s Room argument. Their claim is this: Yes, Mary had all the propositional knowledge that could be known about color perception before she left her room. But what she learned when she went out and experienced red for the first time wasn’t propositional knowledge. Rather, Mary gained the ability to distinguish red things when she encountered a red apple. In the first premise, Mary’s complete knowledge of physical facts is propositional knowledge. In the second premise, one acquires a skill rather than learning a new propositional knowledge. Therefore, the argument is invalid because it confuses the two meanings of knowing. This response to the Mary’s Room argument is called the “Ability Hypothesis”.

Is the Ability Hypothesis successful in defending physicalism? Let’s examine it briefly. Yes, it is true that Mary gained the ability to recognize red objects after leaving the room. But can we say that Mary really gained no propositional knowledge? When Mary saw the red apple, she said, “This is what red looks like!” he may say. Doesn’t this sentence express a proposition?If her friends had painted the apple blue and presented it to Mary as if it were red, Mary would still say, “This is what red looks like!” he would say. However, he would be wrong because what he saw was actually blue. So, Mary’s statement about how red looks is the kind of claim that could be true or false. This shows that the information Mary learned was propositional. For the argument to be valid, it would be enough for Mary to learn a new propositional knowledge. So, I think the Talent Hypothesis fails to answer the Mary’s Room argument.



The purpose of a thought experiment is to encourage speculation, logical thinking and to change paradigms. Thought experiments push us outside our comfort zone by forcing us to confront questions we cannot answer with ease. They demonstrate gaps in our knowledge and help us recognize the limits of what can be known.

Mary’s Room is a thought experiment that seeks to demonstrate the existence of knowledge and non-physical attributes that can only be attained through conscious experience. The idea that all information is physical knowledge is attempted to be debunked.



‘time is slipping away’



Artist Name: Yona Kawaii
Near Wallet ID: yonakawaii.near
Mary’s Room is a thought experiment that attempts to establish that there are non-physical properties and attainable knowledge that can be discovered only through conscious experience. It attempts to refute the theory that all knowledge is physical knowledge.

It seems blatantly evident that she will gain knowledge about the world and how we see it visually. The fact that her prior knowledge was lacking, however, is inevitable. But she was in possession of every physical detail. Thus, physicalism is untrue and there is more to have than that. It is obvious that the same type of knowledge argument might be used to argue for taste, hearing, physiological sensations, and generally for the different mental states that are said to have (as it is variably described) raw feelings, phenomenal properties, or qualia.


meybe Mary needed a little talk with her namesake to understand



the last one.
the text says:

:us: Maria is in a room, maybe a cave, we don’t know. What we do know is that your world is gray, made of shadows. When the door opens, she manages to crawl out of the underground. She is blinded by the beautiful brightness and colors and in a glimpse of epiphany, she realizes that there are layers to our surroundings: what is; what we think it is; and what could be.

:brazil: Maria está em um quarto, talvez uma caverna, não sabemos. O que sabemos é que seu mundo é cinza, feito de sombras. Quando a porta se abre, ela consegue rastejar para fora do subterrâneo. Ela fica cega belo brilho e cores e num vislumbre de epifania, percebe que há camadas nos que nos cerca: o que é; o que pensamos que é; eo que pode ser.



This art work of mine illustrates how seeing different thing for the first time can probably add something new to us given that we know it’s properties or we know about its existence.
The roots attached to the face as well as the book symbolizes how Mary was purely relying in the knowledge she has about colors. While the tiny vines created by the colors of the flower illustrates how new knowledge formed as she felt what it’s like to see colored flower.

Having to know the science behind how colors where created is a knowledge, but “knowing how it feels like to see that color is a knowledge too”
We might know every physical aspect about structure, function, and properties that make up things but still don’t know how it feels like to see those.