Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>> wrote: > > > > > > > Each observer moment lives only transiently and is not in > telepathic > > > communication with any other OMs, whether related to it or > not. The > > > effect (or illusion) of continuity of consciousness is > adequately > > > explained by each OM remembering past experiences. These past > > > experiences need not have happened at all, let alone > happened in the > > > remembered order and in the remembered body. > > > > It seems you are simultaneously asserting that an OM is an > isolated, > > experience of one thing and contrarily that it includes > memories of > > past experiences. That makes it a compound. If an OM can > be such > > a compound then it can include memory of which OM was > immediately > > before it and OMs will form a chain (as suggested by Bertrand > > Russell) and define mental "time". Under comp this chain may > branch > > (and merge) but it would not include isolated OMs that didn't > > include memory of a predecessor. > > > > > > The memories of past experiences are called real memories if they > arose > > in the usual causally linked fashion, in the same brain. However, in > > theory they could be false memories. There is no way to tell, from > > within a particular moment of experience, whether remembered moments > > occurred in the remembered order or even occurred at all in the > real world. > > > > Stathis Papaioannou > > I understand that. But if OMs are isolated, unitary experiences, > then there is no way to explain 'consistent continuation' as in > Bruno's comp. OMs that don't happen to be remembering some other OM > are disconnected and are equally consistent and inconsistent with > any other OM. They aren't able to create even the illusion of > continuity. > > > Sure: continuity is created by memory.
But I don't see how. >If there are OMs which don't > remember being you then they are not going to be part of your stream of > consciousness. There's the rub. Almost all my OMs *do not* include consciously remembering being me (or anyone). And if you suppose there is an *unconscious* memory component of an OM then there's a problem with what it means to have an unconscious part of consciousness. Brent Meeker >they might be part of someone else's stream of > consciousness, or just stand in isolation, with no future or past. I > imagine this is what it would be like in the end stages of dementia. > > Stathis Papaioannou > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
