On 27 May 2017, at 17:02, John Clark wrote:
Due to the impenetrable tangle of quotes of quotes of quotes of
quotes of quotes that is epidemic on this list there is
no way to tell who but somebody wrote:
"The point is to recognise that at a certain stage it is no
longer scientific to ignore what is incapable of further explanation
even with a heretofore supremely adequate intellectual toolkit.
That's Bruno's whole point really."
Yes that is Bruno's whole point, and that's why he's wrong.
I would maintain it is supremely scientific to ignore what is
incapable of further explanation even with a supremely adequate
intellectual toolkit. I would insist there is nothing else a
logical person could do.
In fundamental science, if something is beyong explanation, we look
for an explanation why there is something incapable of explanations,
especially when we use an hypothesis like Mechanism whic makes
possible to use mathematical logic and computer science which are full
of explanation of impossibilities of many different kinds.
" Statements, or in effect dogmas, such as the position you
reiterate above to the effect that there is an absolute limit to
understanding"
Turing, Godel, Chaitin, and quantum physicists have already told
us there is a absolute limit to understanding, but even without them
we would still have to face one very important question, does the
chain of "how did that happen?" questions come to a end or does it
not? If is doesn't end then there can never be complete
understanding because there will always be more unanswered
questions, if it does end then eventually you'll come to a brute
fact. There is every indication that "consciousness is the way data
feels when it is being processed" is a brute fact
Not with mechanism. The brute "facts" of mechanism are just RA axioms,
or equivalent.
and it's pointless to ask how did that happen. And that's why
armchair philosophers love to spin consciousness theories on the
internet, it's easy because no theory can be proved or disproved;
and that's why armchair philosophers never spin intelligence
theories, that's hard. Successful intelligence theorists aren't in
armchairs, they're in Silicon Valley.
I was able to figure out it was Bruno Marchal who said the
following:
> Yes. John Clark proceeds like that too. Saying "peepee" when
we introduce the needed pov distinctions.
And John Clark will continue to say "peepee" when Bruno Marchal
insists that idiotic questions like "what one and only one thing
will happen to YOU after YOU walk into a YOU duplicating machine and
YOU becomes 2 YOUS?" are areas for legitimate scientific research.
You have agreed on all points and definition, but you forget to put
them together, of when you do like above, you introduce an ambiguity
by eliminating the "1p" precision.
It just plain obvious to everybody, that when you push on the button,
you (whoever you become) are in front of a door, which once open, will
show you one city, not two cities. As you don't die in the process,
the two you will agree that the question made sense, and they will
both understand that the first person indeterminacy was real in
Helsinki.
You eliminate the FPI by eliminating the subject. As you need to do,
and so you make the point for all people who believes in consciousness
and can reason with mechanism.
Bruno
> It is a theorem of machine theology
And John Clark will continue to say:
"Wow, calling a guy known for disliking religion religious,
never heard that one before, at least I never heard it before I was
12."
John K Clark
--
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.
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
