On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions: > > *yes, doctor*: This is really the sleight of hand that props up the entire > thought experiment. If you agree that you are nothing but your brain > function and that your brain function can be replaced by the functioning of > non-brain devices, then you have already agreed that human individuality is > a universal commodity.
Calling it a sleight of hand is a bit rough. It is the meat of the comp assumption, and spelling it out this way makes it very explicit. Either you agree you can be copied (without feeling a thing), or you don't. If you do, you must face up to the consequences of the argument, if you don't, then you do not accept computationalism, and the consequences of the UDA do not apply to your worldview. > > *Church thesis*: Views computation in isolation, irrespective of resources, > supervenience on object-formed computing elements, etc. This is a > theoretical theory of computation, completely divorced from realism from > the start. What is it that does the computing? How and why does data enter > or exit a computation? It is necessarily an abstract mathematical thesis. The latter two questions simply are relevant. > > *Arithmetical Realism*: The idea that truth values are self justifying > independently of subjectivity or physics is literally a shot in the dark. > Like yes, doctor, this is really swallowing the cow whole from the > beginning and saying that the internal consistency of arithmetic > constitutes universal supremacy without any real indication of > that. AR is not just about internal consistency of mathematics, it is an ontological commitment about the natural numbers. Whatever primitive reality is, AR implies that the primitive reality models the natural numbers. In fact, for COMP, and the UDA, Turing completeness of primitive reality is sufficient, but Bruno chose the natural numbers as his base reality because it is more familiar to his correspondents. > Wouldn't computers tend to be self-correcting by virtue of the pull toward > arithmetic truth within each logic circuit? Where do errors come from? > Again, these two questions seem irrelevant. > Craig > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/Pc173EEJR4IJ. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
