meekerdb wrote:
On 6/12/2015 8:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
What is the need to invoke a universe when we might perhaps be on an
explanation of where the appearance of the universe, and
consciousness/knowledge come from, in a testable way?
That is exactly my criticism of your theory. I think you do need to
invoke a universe, i.e. an environment, in order to supply meaning to
computations and avoid the absurdity of the rock that computes
everything. But if you have to invoke a universe to explain how
computation instantiates thought you can't use thought to explain the
universe. It's just another aspect of the "white rabbit" problem (whose
name I have never understood; white rabbits are common).
You mean that you don't get the allusion to 'Alice in Wonderland'?
All the best phrases come from Lewis Carroll. Like 'Humpty Dumpty
Dictionary' and 'What I tell you three times is true.'
Bruce
It's all very
well to say thought is computation and all computation is implicit in
arithmetic so all thought is implicit in arithmetic. The problem is
getting it out - showing that the rock computes something, not everything.
--
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.
