On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:11 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> *>>> You are the one invoking it to say that some computations are real, >>> and other are not.* >> >> >>And I gave a specific example of what I meant long ago, > > *>I debunked it. * > You debunked it in the same way the Flat Earth Society debunked the idea the Earth is round. > *With mechanism, * > And you said mechanism means the belief that "we can survive a digital brain transplant operation"; so if there is anything in the universe that deserves to be called "certain" it is that because we've already had a brain transplant operation, many of them, and we've survived, or at least I have. > *> if there is a *primitive physical reality* things would be like if 0 = > 1. * > I've asked you many times to explain how you reached that conclusion but you've never been able to, so I won't ask again. > >You confuse mathematical object and their syntactical description. > You confuse the fact that there is an important fundamental difference between describing what Winston Churchill looked like and describing what Harry Potter looked like. > >> You said Mechanism is the belief that "we can survive a digital brain >> transplant operation ", but there is no assumption involved in that, we >> know with as much certainty as we know anything that we can survive that >> because we already have, as I said 3 posts ago: " I know for a fact I have >> survived from the day I was born to today, and every day since I was born I >> have been undergoing a brain transplant operation, atoms are constantly >> shifting out of my brain and new atoms shifting in to replace them. My >> brain is made out of last year's mashed potatoes.” > > > *> That OK FAPP.* > I doubt we will ever become so wise that we understand how the world works for all practical purposes, but if we ever do reach such a glorious point that would be good enough for me. > > But when we do metaphysics seriously, [...] > That is not a serious field of study, metaphysics hasn't discovered anything new in a thousand years, they just keep going over the same ground asking questions that have answers that make no sense because the questions themselves make no sense. > >> And besides, if Everett's Many World's is true then some version of >> you definitely will wake up in the dungeon of some sadistic individual >> regardless of if you're frozen or not. > > > > *Yes, but we have partial control, and change the probabilities.* If Everett is right there is a 100% probability a version of you will wake up tomorrow in the torture dungeon of a sadist and a 100% probability a version of you will not. > But if Everett is right why do I bother to get frozen at all? Because >> although Many Worlds is my favorite quantum interpretation I wouldn't bet >> my life on it. > > > *> That is reasonable. * > I thought so too. 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3DXFa5KLHej_ytDB_7Mqq%2B_TvnZeHqCxrSpb%2B%2BUWtu6Q%40mail.gmail.com.
