On 14 Jan 2014, at 23:09, John Mikes wrote:
Brent:
thanks for submitting Colin Hales' words!
I lost track of him lately in the West-Australian deserts (from
where he seemed to move to become focussed on being accepted for
scientific title(s) by establishment-scientist potentates - what I
never believed of him indeed).
I loved (and tried to digest to some extent) his earlier 'words' -
making them fundamental to my developing agnosticism.
Brent, to your short closing remark:
I do not equate 'being conscious' with the domain-adjective of
consciousness - it may be a certain aspect showing within the
domain, pertinent to 'those lumps of matter' you mention. I aso
value "structure" more than just material functioning. And I wish I
had such (your?) alternative hypotheses... not only my agnosticism
about it.
I agree with most of Colin's un-numbered points on the figment he
called "science of consciousness". What I would have added is a date
of yesterday (and to support it - as I usually do - compare that
level to earlier (millennia?) similar concoctions)
.
And - would have parethesized the territory named 'science' in them
all.
Well: what - IS - the LAW OF NATURE as widely believed? It is the
majority of results of observed (poorly understood?) phenomena
within the portion of Everything we so far got access to - and that,
too, in our mind's adjustment at its actual level (inventory).
(Wording mostly based on Colin's earlier writings)
It depends on the boundaries WE CHOSE. Consider different boundaries
and the LAW will change immediately, even within our unchanged
ignorance of the totality.
From what I understand, Colin's try to introduce in the exact
sciences the lack of rigor of the human sciences. I believe in the
contrary: we must come back to rigor in the human and fundamental
science.
I don't see at all how Colin's approach can be consistent with the
correct-machine, and human, fundamental agnosticism.
Bruno
Thank you, Colins (and Brent)
John Mikes
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 4:44 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>
wrote:
On 1/12/2014 9:42 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
I'm sorry I repeat this answer so many times, but this claim is also
made so many times. The main problem I see with this idea is that no
progress has been made so far in explaining how a lump of matter
becomes conscious, as opposed to just being a zombie mechanically
performing complex behaviors. Insisting that such an explanation must
exist instead of entertaining other models of reality strikes me as a
form of mysticism.
Well we know that one lump of matter is conscious and we think some
others that are structually similar are and that some others are
not. A plausible hypothesis is that the consciousness is a
consequence of the structure. Alternative hypotheses would have to
explain this coincidence.
Brent
--
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.
--
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
