On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 06:49:33PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > We agree, but after the reversal "materialism" has not the same > meaning than before the reversal, and I agree with your use, as it > is coherent with comp, but it can be misleading for those who miss > it, or does not really take into account. > > With comp, consciousness supervenes on matter, but still > accidentally so, and in virtue that some 1p-winning computations are > Turing complete.
Actually, here I disagree. Physical supervenience is not accidental, but required to circumvent the Occam catastrophe. Furthermore, if physical supervenience were not a law, we would expect to find some physical fact that is incompatible with our existence. That has not only not been observed, but also a very large number of physical facts seem to be quite finely tuned so as to permit our existence. So it is good that COMP is compatible with physical supervenience after all, and my understanding of the MGA is that COMP is therefore incompatible with the non-robust reality. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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/d/optout.
