On 6 May 2017 10:16 p.m., "Brent Meeker" <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:



On 5/6/2017 12:59 PM, David Nyman wrote:



On 6 May 2017 8:08 p.m., "Brent Meeker" <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:



On 5/6/2017 1:49 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

> Exactly why I used arithmetic as the example.  Arithmetic, according to
>>>> your theory of consciousness, is independent of perception and physics.
>>>> Conscious thoughts, beliefs are entailed by arithmetic and so should be
>>>> independent of tequila.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That does not follow. Even Robinso Arithmetic can prove that a machine
>>> drinking some amount of tequila will prove anything.
>>>
>>
>> That would be impressive.  Is this proof published?
>>
>
> It is trivial. RA computes all states reaction in all computational
> histories. RA is a universal dovetailer, to be short. In the simulation of
> tequila + brain, people get drunk.
>

That's what I was afraid of.  Your theory successfully predicts it because
it predicts "everything", including people drink tequila and don't get
drunk.


Yes, but the key is the measure, isn't it. Everett also predicts that
everything consistent with QM happens. Somehow this leads to a
probabilistic account of what to expect. We know the math but we don't know
the reason. You're no doubt bored with my banging on about Hoyle, but I
must say that his is so far the only metaphor that has ever conveyed to me
how something could be both certain and uncertain depending on one's point
of view. So I think it's far too tricksy to say that comp predicts
everything (or Everett, or eternal inflation for that matter). The key is
the measure and how that measure discriminates between the typical, the
unusual, and the downright weird. Open problem, sure, but hardly an empty
or pointless one.


But that's what I mean when I say Bruno's theory has no predictive
success.  QM (and Everett) would correctly predict that alcohol molecules
in the blood will interfere with neuronal function and THEN invoking the
physicalist theory of mind, i.e. that mind supervenes on material events,
it predicts that your ability to do arithmetic will be impaired by drinking
tequila.  It will NOT predict the contrary with more than infinitesimal
probability.  So it's misdirection to say that it's just a measure
problem.  Without having the right measure a probabilistic theory is just
fantasy...or magic as Bruno would say.


I have no idea why you say that. I thought it was clear that if
computationalism doesn't (ultimately) predict that its predominating
computational mechanism (i.e. the one effectively self-selected by complex
subjects, in this case, like ourselves) is the physics those selfsame
subjects observe, then it must fail. In effect, at that point we would have
arrived at a notion of computation that did indeed appear to supervene on
objects in the effective physical environment, albeit qua computatio, as
Bruno was wont to say. Hence if the physical brain got plastered, so would
the mind apparently supervening on it.

David



Brent



David



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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to