Steady on, old fellow. We know about Maudlin's argument (which
essentially the same as Bruno's MGA), which indicates the
incompatibility of materialism and COMP.
I know you had some argument against COMP, but I never really got
it. Maybe you could try summarising/simplifying it for the group. But
On 29 Jan 2011, at 06:27, ColinHales wrote:
Now say "humans are conscious? Prove it."
To which I say "COMP is true? Prove it"
Been around this loop many times. :-)
COMP is a solution of x -> ~Bx, like consciousness, and consistency.
If COMP is true, it is no provable.
If I am conscious, t
On 29 Jan 2011, at 04:59, Rex Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
On 28 Jan 2011, at 18:48, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 1/27/2011 8:34 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Brent Meeker>
wrote:
What does "locally" mean in this context? I dou
Rex,
Well here I disagree (with Wikipedia, not with Turing, although he is
responsible for this widespread misconception).
The discovery of the universal machine by Turing is the discovery of a
finite Turing machine capable of emulating all the other machine from
a number description (a p
Rex, Brent,
On 1/28/2011 7:59 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
On 28 Jan 2011, at 18:48, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 1/27/2011 8:34 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Brent Meeker>
wrote:
What does "locally" mean in this con
On this list we've talked about "observer moments" (OM) quite a lot,
but I always found the notion that some pattern represents a conscious
state to be problematic.
I have written up a draft of a paper, see here:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.4472
One can use the reasoning in the end of the paper
Welcome!
I haven't been active on this list lately. Your article looks very
interesting, I'll read it in detail.
Saibal
Citeren Travis Garrett :
Hi everybody,
My name is Travis - I'm currently working as a postdoc at the
Perimeter Institute. I got an email from Richard Gordon and Evge
Hi, Colin,
I enjoyed your diatribe. (From time to time I accept some of your ideas and
even include them into my ways of thinking - which may be a praise or a
threat).
Question: Could you briefly identify your usage of "science" - even
"scientist"?
(sometimes I consider an 'average' (=multitude o
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:02 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
>>> On 1/27/2011 8:34 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
I would have thought that dreams would be a pretty clear
counter-example to the claim that consciousness requires a world to
interact with...?
>>>
>>> Do you think you could have dr
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
> On 1/28/2011 7:54 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Brent Meeker
>> wrote:
>>> On 1/27/2011 10:08 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Brent Meeker
wrote:
> But if the emulation attempt
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Rex,
>
> Well here I disagree (with Wikipedia, not with Turing, although he is
> responsible for this widespread misconception).
Well, I'll buy that, I reckon. Though the usage of the term "infinite
tape" is pretty widespread. I see it lot
On 1/29/2011 10:41 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Rex,
Well here I disagree (with Wikipedia, not with Turing, although he is
responsible for this widespread misconception).
Well, I'll buy that, I reckon. Though the usage of the term "infi
12 matches
Mail list logo
