Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 2:27:18 AM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > On 9/5/2012 12:40 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 11:14:17 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: >> >> On 9/4/2012 9:07 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, September 4,

Re: Re: Toward emulating life with a monadic computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Stephen P. King There was only one Big Bang, at least this time around, because they have been able to measure it happening about 19 billion years ago. There are otgher measurments such as the background radiation that tell us more about it. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz

Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Stephen P. King No, the stuff in our skulls is alive, has intelligence, and a 1p. Computers don't and can't. Big sdifference. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the f

Re: Re: Re: monads as numbers

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg I obviously misunderstood your point. I still don't. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Craig Weinberg Receiver: eve

Re: Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Jason Resch There's no ontological difference between a computer and an abacus. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Jason Resch Rece

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Two reasons why computers IMHO cannot exhibitintelligence

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi John Clark God is real but cannot be found within spacetime because he is unextended. So scientific talk about God is meaningless. Actually, all science talk is meaningless if it is scientific. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to i

Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Jason Resch Sorry. What needs explanation ? Or is that even the right question ? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Jason Resch Re

Re: Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi John Clark Apparently you fear you will not be able to tell which is true-- and in what cases-- 17th cent philosophical statements or modern science. As a rule of thumb you might be skeptical about some statements of 17th century philosophers on science. But in some other cases one of them is

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Two reasons why computers IMHO cannot exhibitintelligence

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi John Clark "There was once a patent issued for a combination rat trap and potato peeler and people laugh about that, but using the exact same organ for both excretory and reproductive purposes does not seem very intelligent to me either, much less infinitely intelligent. And putting the blood

Re: Re: Fwd: The All

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Richard, It occurred to me after I sent the previous that only the Supreme monad can perceive becaise the rest of them can't (they have no windows) yet their "perceptioons" are continually being updated. I don't usually think in terms of particular monadology statements, Leibniz is perfectly

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Russell Standish
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:26:53PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 10:09:45 PM UTC-4, Russell Standish wrote: > > It is the meat of the > > comp assumption, and spelling it out this way makes it very > > explicit. Either you agree you can be copied (without feel

The morality of capitalism

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Richard Ruquist Capitalism is not a form of morality unless you consider expanding the wealth of an entire nation to be moral. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the f

Re: The morality of capitalism

2012-09-05 Thread Richard Ruquist
Roger, That is exactly my point: if "the USERS of wealth in directing the life of the country." export jobs overseas and hide their money there as well, they are immoral. Richard On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Richard Ruquist > > Capitalism is not a form of morality u

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Russell Standish
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 12:37:22AM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote: > > Hi Russel, > > In Craig's defense. When did ontological considerations become a > matter of contingency? You cannot "Choose" what is Real! That is the > entire point of Reality. It is not up to the choice of any one. It > is

Time travel and eternal life

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg Speaking of teleportation, if that means time travel, I find it strangely comforting that my parents are actually, really alive back there in 1950. So in effect, you never die, you just get time-shifted. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there

Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg IMHO the burden to show that computers are alive and have intelligence lies on the scientists. I see no evidence of life or real intelligence in computers. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that

Re: Re: consciousness as the experiencre of time

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg Exactly. There may a problem with this, but its seems that if mind is everywhere (is inextended, so space is irrelevant), I am always part of the mind of God. So saying that- when I look out of my eyes, that is actually God looking out- which sounds of course weird. Or that t

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> We knew you didn't accept this, so the rest of the argument is irrelevant >> to you. However, I'm still not sure despite multiple posts what your >> position is on how much of your brain function could be replaced by an >> appropriate machi

Re: Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg Lord of the Flies is basically the conservative view put forth by Hobbes (and Paul). At root we are criminals. Welfare is essentially the leftist view put forth by Rousseau. At root we are saints. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If th

Re: Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg I don't like the word "existence" as it carries so much baggage with it. What you describe below is physical existence. That is a property of extended entities. Inextended entities such as mind and 1p and thouights and feelings would be mentally existent. Roger Clough, rclo

Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Jason Resch What you call a virtual world, Kant and Leibniz call the phenomenal world. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Jason Resch

Re: The All

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Sep 2012, at 16:42, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal According to Leibniz there is only one live perceiver, and that he calls the Supreme Monad. Actually, not the monad itself, but what sees through the monad.Then when we see individually we must see through that one eye. I believe i

Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Sep 2012, at 16:49, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal IMHO God is the All, or better said, the uncreated intelligence behind all creation. With the comp assumption, this sentence makes clear that Arithmetical Truth, a strongly non computational reality, and which is uncreated

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Sep 2012, at 17:48, Stephen P. King wrote: On 9/4/2012 10:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Aug 2012, at 12:04, benjayk wrote: Strangely you agree for the 1-p viewpoint. But given that's what you *actually* live, I don't see how it makes sense to than proceed that there is a meaningfu

Re: Two reasons why computers IMHO cannot exhibit intelligence

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Sep 2012, at 18:09, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/9/4 William R. Buckley Seems funny that Turing “…assumed that machines could not operate with infinite numbers…” given that the tape is assumed to be infinite. Not really infinite but it has no boundaries, it can always extend if n

Re: Two reasons why computers IMHO cannot exhibit intelligence

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Sep 2012, at 18:42, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 Roger Clough wrote: > God created the human race. And when God asks Himself the question "Why have I always existed, why haven't I always not existed?" what answer in his omniscience does He come up with? The neoplatonis

Re: Two reasons why computers IMHO cannot exhibit intelligence

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Sep 2012, at 21:47, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Yes, we simulated some systems, but they couldn't perform the same function. A pump does the function of an heart. No. A pump just pumps blood. The heart also performs endocrine functions, it can react dynamically to the bra

Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Jason Resch
On Sep 5, 2012, at 7:45 AM, "Roger Clough" wrote: Hi Jason Resch What you call a virtual world, Kant and Leibniz call the phenomenal world. Where did I use the term virtual world? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Sep 2012, at 22:40, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Right. It makes only first person sense to PA. But then RA has succeeded in making PA alive, and PA could a posteriori realize that the RA level was enough. Sorry, but it can't. It can't even abstract itself out to see that

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Sep 2012, at 03:48, Craig Weinberg wrote: Taking another look at Sane2004. This isn't so much as a challenge to Bruno, just sharing my notes of why I disagree. Not sure how far I will get this time, but here are my objections to the first step and the stipulated assumptions of comp.

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 8:18:07 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > >> We knew you didn't accept this, so the rest of the argument is > irrelevant > >> to you. However, I'm still not sure despite multiple posts what your > >>

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:14, meekerdb wrote: On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions: *yes, doctor*: This is really the sleight of hand that props up the entire thought

Re: Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 8:43:35 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Craig Weinberg > > > I don't like the word "existence" as it carries > so much baggage with it. What you describe > below is physical existence. That is a property > of extended entities. > I agree, existence means diffe

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:48, Stephen P. King wrote: On 9/5/2012 12:14 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions: *yes, doctor*: This is really the sleig

Re: Re: The All

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal No, the supreme Monad can see everything even though the monads have no windows. Also the "closeness to God" issue depends on your clarity of vision and feeling. And perhaps appetites. So everybody's different. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "I

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 10:50:02 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 05 Sep 2012, at 03:48, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > Taking another look at Sane2004. This isn't so much as a challenge to > Bruno, just sharing my notes of why I disagree. Not sure how far I will get > this time, but

Re: Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal He called himself yhwh, and said "I am that I am". Jews consider the name God to be sacred and not to be said aloud. They will write it as perhaps G.d. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everythin

Re: Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 8:18:44 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Craig Weinberg > > Lord of the Flies is basically the conservative view put forth by Hobbes > (and Paul). > At root we are criminals. > > Welfare is essentially the leftist view put forth by Rousseau. > At root

Re: Re: Two reasons why computers IMHO cannot exhibit intelligence

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal God also created time, and anyway eternity is timeless, not sure if spacless. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Sep 2012, at 14:01, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 12:37:22AM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Russel, In Craig's defense. When did ontological considerations become a matter of contingency? You cannot "Choose" what is Real! That is the entire point of Reality. It i

Re: Re: consciousness as the experiencre of time

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 8:11:39 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Craig Weinberg > > Exactly. There may a problem with this, but its seems > that if mind is everywhere (is inextended, so space is irrelevant), > I am always part of the mind of God. So saying that- when I look out > of

Re: Re: Re: monads as numbers

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 6:45:06 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Craig Weinberg > > I obviously misunderstood your point. > I still don't. > > If there's something in particular I can clarify, let me know and I'll try my best. Craig > > Roger Clough, rcl...@verizon.net > 9/5/

Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Sep 2012, at 14:45, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Jason Resch What you call a virtual world, Kant and Leibniz call the phenomenal world. Hmm.. You simplify too much. Virtual means simulated or emulated by a universal machine, and this is a 3p notion. The 1p is the phenomenal reality, an

Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 6:38:07 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Stephen P. King > > No, the stuff in our skulls is alive, has intelligence, and a 1p. > Computers don't and can't. Big sdifference. > > Hi Roger, > > 锟斤拷� Please leave magic out of this, as "any sufficiently advanced

Re: Re: The morality of capitalism

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Richard Ruquist It is immoral to you, but the stockholders love it. And so do the consumers of the company's products. In my personal ethics, what is moral enhances life. the immoral diminishes life. If anything, as observed above, the company is creating wealth and so enhancing life. What

Re: Re: Two reasons why computers IMHO cannot exhibit intelligence

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal I've been defending cosmic intelligence (CI) or Cosmic Mind, of Life , not the christian God, not the whole shebang, the Trinity. But actually I think they're probably all the same. CI was there before the world was created-- for sure, else the world could not have been

Re: Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
I don't think that life or mind or intelligence can be teleported. Especially since nobody knows what they are. I also don't believe that you can download the contents of somebody's brain. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him

Re: The All

2012-09-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Roger, On 05 Sep 2012, at 17:23, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal No, the supreme Monad can see everything even though the monads have no windows. Also the "closeness to God" issue depends on your clarity of vision and feeling. And perhaps appetites. So everybody's different. I agre

Re: Re: The morality of capitalism

2012-09-05 Thread Richard Ruquist
It is immoral to cause a recession that puts many out of work and subsequently loss of home via foreclosure. Bank of America is actually giving away some of the homes they have foreclosed. On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Richard Ruquist > > It is immoral to you, but the

Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Bruno Marchal Perhaps wrongly, I think of the world of monads as the virtual world. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal

Re: Re: Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg Insist. Interesting idea. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Craig Weinberg Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-0

The two tribes

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg In politics there are thus two tribes (always have been, always will be: a) Lord of the Flies is basically the conservative view put forth by Hobbes (and Paul). At root we are savages. b) Welfare is essentially the leftist view put forth by Rousseau. At root we are saints. I

Reality

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Leibniz, my mentor, believed that reality (being mental) consists of an infinite collection of (inextended) mathematical points called monads. These can never be created or destroyed. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him

Re: Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Craig Weinberg Leibniz's universe is completely alive, as was Whitehead's. Whitehead in particular spoke of events (as I recall) as "occasions of experience". Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could

Re: Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Roger Clough
Hi Jason Resch virtual reality model Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Jason Resch Receiver: everything-list@googlegroups.com Time:

Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread John Clark
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > Let's see, average survival of a Las Vegas hotel is what, 30 years? Then > they blow them up. > Yes, after that time a Las Vegas hotel no longer serves a function. The Egyptian pyramids are quite different in that respect, they NEVER had a

Re: Simple proof that our intelligence transcends that of computers

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/5/2012 9:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Sep 2012, at 17:48, Stephen P. King wrote: On 9/4/2012 10:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Aug 2012, at 12:04, benjayk wrote: Strangely you agree for the 1-p viewpoint. But given that's what you *actually* live, I don't see how it makes sense

Re: God has no self-reference power at all

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/5/2012 9:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: The neoplatonist conception of God does not allow It to ask such a question. Nor does Arithmetical Truth. God has no self-reference power at all, as this would make it inconsistent. Dear Bruno, Might it be agreeable to you to stipulate the pos

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/5/2012 11:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:48, Stephen P. King wrote: On 9/5/2012 12:14 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: I have problems with all three of the comp assumptio

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread meekerdb
On 9/5/2012 5:17 AM, Craig wrote: The test that I would use would be, as I have mentioned, to have someone be > walked off of their brain one hemisphere at a time, and then walked back on. > Ideally this process would be repeated several times for different > durations. That is the only test t

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread meekerdb
On 9/5/2012 8:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Put in another way: there is no ontological hardware. The hardware and wetware are emergent on the digital basic ontology (which can be described by numbers or combinators as they describe the same computations and the same object: you can prove the exis

Re: Why a bacterium has more intelligence than a computer

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/5/2012 1:40 PM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Craig Weinberg > Leibniz's universe is completely alive, as was Whitehead's. > Whitehead in particular spoke of events (as I recall) > as "occasions of experience". > Hi Roger, A.N.Whitehead's idea is similar to a version of Craig's sense idea made in

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/5/2012 11:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 05 Sep 2012, at 14:01, Russell Standish wrote: For certain choices of "this or that", the ultimate reality is actually unknowable. For instance, the choice of a Turing complete basis means that the hardware running the computations is completely

maudlin's paper

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
Hi Folks, I started reading the new Maudlin paper "Time and the Geometry of the Universe". I got it and started reading. I stopped dead when I read the following: "Empirical considerations cannot establish the existence of such point events, but the geometrical tools discussed herein pre

Re: maudlin's paper

2012-09-05 Thread Richard Ruquist
I think he was just saying that point events do not exist. On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I started reading the new Maudlin paper "Time and the Geometry of the > Universe". I got it and started reading. I stopped dead when I read the > following: > > "E

Re: maudlin's paper

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/5/2012 6:52 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: I think he was just saying that point events do not exist. So why discuss them? On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Folks, I started reading the new Maudlin paper "Time and the Geometry of the Universe". I got it

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > The ability to test depends entirely on my familiarity with the human and > how good the technology is. Can I touch them, smell them? If so, then I > would be surprised if I could be fooled by an inorganic body. Has there ever > been one syn

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread meekerdb
On 9/5/2012 5:14 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: The ability to test depends entirely on my familiarity with the human and how good the technology is. Can I touch them, smell them? If so, then I would be surprised if I could be fooled by an

Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 1:50:11 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > > Let's see, average survival of a Las Vegas hotel is what, 30 years? Then >> they blow them up. >> > > Yes, after that time a Las Vegas hotel no longer serv

Re: maudlin's paper

2012-09-05 Thread Russell Standish
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 06:23:57PM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I started reading the new Maudlin paper "Time and the Geometry > of the Universe". I got it and started reading. I stopped dead when > I read the following: > > "Empirical considerations cannot establish the exis

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Russell Standish
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:37:18PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 05 Sep 2012, at 14:01, Russell Standish wrote: > > > >For certain choices of "this or that", the ultimate reality is > >actually unknowable. For instance, the choice of a Turing complete > >basis means that the hardware running

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 3:13:05 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 9/5/2012 5:17 AM, Craig wrote: > > The test that I would use would be, as I have mentioned, to have someone be> > walked off of their brain one hemisphere at a time, and then walked back on.> > Ideally this process would be

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 3:13:05 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: >> >> On 9/5/2012 5:17 AM, Craig wrote: >> >> The test that I would use would be, as I have mentioned, to have someone >> be >> > walked off of their brain one hemisphere at

Re: maudlin's paper

2012-09-05 Thread Stephen P. King
On 9/5/2012 9:18 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 06:23:57PM -0400, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Folks, I started reading the new Maudlin paper "Time and the Geometry of the Universe". I got it and started reading. I stopped dead when I read the following: "Empirical consi

Re: Digest for everything-list@googlegroups.com - 25 Messages in 6 Topics

2012-09-05 Thread Charles Goodwin
> > "Stephen P. King" Sep 05 07:06PM -0400 >On 9/5/2012 6:52 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> I think he was just saying that point events do not exist. > >So why discuss them? > > Yes, what's the point? :-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:32 AM, meekerdb wrote: > I agree with all you say, except the implication of the last sentence: that > evolution would never produce results with some inessential side effect. > First, evolution has to produce things by evolving - not starting from a > clean sheet. In t

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:21:34 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 3:13:05 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > >> > >> On 9/5/2012 5:17 AM, Craig wrote: > >> > >> The test that I would use wo

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 11:26:43 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:32 AM, meekerdb > > wrote: > > > I agree with all you say, except the implication of the last sentence: > that > > evolution would never produce results with some inessential side effect. > > Fir

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> But you couldn't realise you felt different if the part of your brain >> responsible for realising were receiving exactly the same inputs from >> the rest of the brain. So you could feel different, or feel nothing, >> but maintain the delus

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > I find that the least plausible explanation. It means that if a billion > people talk to each other and give each other information, that some kind of > consciousness must necessarily arise as a side-effect. You could say that it > might ari

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:25:02 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > >> But you couldn't realise you felt different if the part of your brain > >> responsible for realising were receiving exactly the same inputs from > >> the re

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:32:21 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > > I find that the least plausible explanation. It means that if a billion > > people talk to each other and give each other information, that some > kind of >

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread meekerdb
On 9/5/2012 10:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:25:02 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Craig Weinberg > wrote: >> But you couldn't realise you felt different if the part of your brain >> responsible for realising were recei

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread meekerdb
On 9/5/2012 10:44 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:32:21 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Craig Weinberg > wrote: > I find that the least plausible explanation. It means that if a billion > people talk to each other and give e

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:49:37 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 9/5/2012 10:39 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:25:02 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Craig Weinberg >> wrote: >> >> >> But you couldn't realise you felt di

Re: Sane2004 Step One

2012-09-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:52:11 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 9/5/2012 10:44 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:32:21 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Craig Weinberg >> wrote: >> >> > I find that the least plausible expla