OK, This post is clearer. forget my early reply.
On 16 Oct 2012, at 15:55, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
2012/10/11 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
On 10 Oct 2012, at 20:13, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
2012/10/10 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>:
On 09 Oct 2012, at 18:58, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
It may be a zombie or not. I can´t know.
The same applies to other persons. It may be that the world is made of
zombie-actors that try to cheat me, but I have an harcoded belief in
the conventional thing. Maybe it is, because otherwise, I will act
in strange and self destructive ways. I would act as a paranoic, after
that, as a psycopath (since they are not humans). That will not be
good for my success in society. Then, I doubt that I will have any
surviving descendant that will develop a zombie-solipsist
epistemology.
However there are people that believe these strange things. Some
autists do not recognize humans as beings like him. Some psychopaths
too, in a different way. There is no authistic or psichopathic
epistemology because the are not functional enough to make societies
with universities and philosophers. That is the whole point of
evolutionary epistemology.
If comp leads to solipsism, I will apply for being a plumber.
I don't bet or believe in solipsism.
But you were saying "that a *conscious* robot" can lack a soul. See
the
quote just below.
That is what I don't understand.
Bruno
I think that It is not comp what leads to solipsism but any
existential stance that only accept what is certain and discard what
is only belief based on conjectures.
It can go no further than "cogito ergo sum"
OK. But that has nothing to do with comp. That would conflate the 8
person points in only one of them (the "feeler, probably). Only the
feeler is that solipsist, at the level were he feels, but the
machine's self manage all different points of view, and the living
solipsist (each of us) is not mandate to defend the solipsist
doctrine (he is the only one existing)/ he is the only one he can
feel, that's all. That does not imply the non existence of others
and other things.
That pressuposes a lot of things that I have not for granted.
It does no pressuppose anything more than the computationalist
hypothesis. If you think it does, please tell me what.
I have to accept my beliefs as such beliefs to be at the same time
rational and functional. With respect to the others consciousness,
being humans or robots, I can only have faith. No matter if I accept
that this is a matter of faith or not.
I agree with you, so I guess I miss something.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
