On 4/14/2015 11:33 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2015-04-15 5:12 GMT+02:00 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>:
On 4/14/2015 9:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2015-04-14 18:40 GMT+02:00 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>:
On 4/13/2015 11:31 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le 14 avr. 2015 08:04, "Stathis Papaioannou" <stath...@gmail.com
<mailto:stath...@gmail.com>> a écrit :
> Certainly some theories of consciousness might not allow copying, but
> that cannot be a logical requirement. To claim that something is
> logically impossible is to claim that it is self-contradictory.
I don't see why a theory saying like I said in the upper paragraph that
consciousness could not be copied would be selfcontradictory... You
have to
see that when you say consciousness is duplicatable, you assume a lot of
things about the reality and how it is working, and that you're making a
metaphysical commitment, a leap of faith concerning what you assume the
real
to be and the reality itself. That's all I'm saying, but clearly if
computationalism is true consciousness is obviously duplicatable.
Quentin
In order to say what duplication of consciousness is and whether it is
non-contradictory you need some propositional definition of it. Not
just, an
instrospective "well everybody knows what it is".
It seems that's what I was explaining... or are you answering to Stathis ?
No, it's not clear to me what definition of consciousness you're using.
Are you
supposing that two streams of thought which are identical would constitute
two
different consciousness'es?
I have don't have to have one, I don't pretend anything about consciousness, I'm saying
Stathis does have one *to pretend* consciousness is duplicable; and that his statement
"consciousness is duplicable" is rooted in a metaphysical commitment to one (o
r more) theorie(s) about reality,
I agree that Stathis must be using some unexpressed definition in order to assert that
consciousness is duplicable. But also that you must being using some different definition
to assert that it is not. So I'm asking which one you are using?
Brent
without that commitment "consciousness is duplicable" has no meaning by itself and is
not an absolute truth... are you really reading what I write, or only what you want to
read ?
Quentin
--
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.
