The Anti knowledge argument

Richard Brown presents the knowledge argument

Mary is kept in a box and taught all the physical facts but no qualitative facts
she is then allowed out of her box and shown the colour RED

(1) If qualitative facts are reducible to, or deducible from, physical facts then May shouldn’t learn anything new
(2) Mary learns something new
(C) Therefore qualitative facts are not reducible to, or deducible from, physical facts

and the anti knowledge argument

Now Maria knows all of the qualitative facts about red she knows none of the phsyical facts she is then exposed to those facts

(1r) If qualitative facts are not reducible to, or deducible from, physical facts Maria should not learn anything new
(2r) Maria learns something new
(Cr) Qualitative facts are reducible to, or deducible from, physical facts

Interesting although I'm still thinking about it. However that make me think of a thought experiment of my own.

Lets say I take Maria before she has seen green and ask her what green is. Answer is "I have no idea"
Now lets say I show Maria green - now she says "yes I know green"
Now I use my high technology to recreate a duplicate of her by carrying over all her physical data but not any historic qualia (whatever that is?). I plonk all this info in a biological computer. I now ask it what green is - does it know? Well it tells me it does. Also because it is a biological computer - it is alive - it isn't a zombie.

and yet I only transfered physical data.

the main defense seems to be that colour qualia have some special properties - for example that they are associated with a person if and only if they have the physical data for that colour but if that is the case the original knowledge argument fails - i.e. if you tell maria those attacked physical facts about green then she knows green.