On Friday, July 19, 2013 8:21:42 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On 20 July 2013 06:59, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > >> If a dog started talking in full English sentences without > >> manipulation by an outside force the explanation must be in the > >> physics of its body. I don't think this statement is either clever or > >> controversial. And if the physics of the dog's body is computable then > >> it should be possible to make an artificial dog controlled by a > >> computer that talks in full English sentences just like the real dog. > >> I don't think that statement is either clever or controversial either. > >> It can be seen to be true in the absence of any understanding of dog > >> physiology. > >> > > > > Of course the sensory-motive capacities of anything are reflected in > > physics, but it is not necessarily transitive. Physics may not be able > > replicate a particular being's sense or motive any more than the > characters > > in a movie can change their own script. > > It's either the physics inside the movie or the physics outside the > movie if the universe is causally closed. >
The physics outside the movie is sensory-motive. The production of the movie has voluntary intention (will) and involuntary unintention (cause). The movie strips out the former locally (through thermodynamic irreversibility, loss of entropy), while perception (sense) reconstitutes it absolutely (significance, gain of solitrophy (entropy+signficance). There's yer dark energy. Craig > > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
