On 7/27/2019 4:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 Jul 2019, at 19:29, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
On 7/26/2019 12:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
But it seems like an ad hoc assumption to save your theory.
On the contrary, it becomes a theorem.
Bruno
OK, what's the proof that humans need a brain, given nothing but
computationalism as an axiom.
Computationalism requires a universal machine A implemented in another
universal machine or universal machinery B.
Are you claiming that follows deductively from YD+CT? Or that its
"required" in order that your theory hold?
B can be arithmetic or any universal machinery or universal number.
The universal machine A is the one that the machine will call brain, if it
persists in the majority of the computational extensions, and it will seems
like a physical gift.
The brain is a physical thing. All your other "machines" are platonic
objects. So it makes no sense to say that brains, or which there are
many, is "the universal machine", which is a platonic concept.
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d28e4f3c-1306-0181-0e2f-4cbe27d7fc73%40verizon.net.
