Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

John Clark wrote: On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 Telmo Menezes > wrote: > >And now that I have answered you question I repeat my question that you dodged: Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or Mr. John Clark The Hels

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > You have already ans unambiguously agree that the Moscow Man is the same > person than the Helsinki Man, in the same sense than in step 1. > As I said before the relationship is not symmetrical. Cats are unambiguously animals but it would be wrong to

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 12 Apr 2015, at 00:44, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 , Telmo Menezes wrote: >I have this crazy idea to remove the supposed ambiguity: ask a specific Telmo if his prediction was correct or not. If Telmo were logical then that would be a good idea, a randomly picked Telmo woul

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 12 Apr 2015, at 01:57, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > You have already agreed that John Clark's 3p surivive in both place, I agree that John Clark survives, I have no idea who John Clark 3p is supposed to be; I never saw the point of your peepee terminolo

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > You have already agreed that John Clark's 3p surivive in both place, > I agree that John Clark survives, I have no idea who John Clark 3p is supposed to be; I never saw the point of your peepee terminology. > > so his first person experience whic

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 , Telmo Menezes wrote: > >I have this crazy idea to remove the supposed ambiguity: ask a specific > Telmo if his prediction was correct or not. > If Telmo were logical then that would be a good idea, a randomly picked Telmo would say "I heard Telmo over there say that he s

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 11 April 2015 at 21:09, Telmo Menezes wrote: > Ok. I have an idea about that, it is probably not original. Tell me what > you think: > The universe was not created. All possible states just exist. The moment > of the big bang is one of the many possible states. What we call the past > is a seq

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:43 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > > >> >>And now that I have answered you question I repeat my question that you >>> dodged: Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John >>> Clark or Mr. John Clark The Helsinki M

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 10 Apr 2015, at 22:43, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: >>And now that I have answered you question I repeat my question that you dodged: Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? > Both are. E

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > >>And now that I have answered you question I repeat my question that you >> dodged: Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John >> Clark or Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? >> > > > Both are. Everyone is. > Then when Mr. John Clar

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:51 PM, LizR wrote: > Surely the illusion is that you are the same person > How would things be different if it were not a illusion? And don't call me Shirley. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:51 PM, LizR wrote: > Let's say that on this occasion pressing the teleport button renders > H-man unconscious, and he is sent to either Moscow or Washington by > conventional means, then woken up in the teleport booth at the other end. > If Mr. Helsinki thinks he's still

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:40 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com > > wrote: > > >> >> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark >>> or Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? >>> >> >> > Have you ever met anyone who doesn't feel lik

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 3:10 AM, LizR wrote: > On 8 April 2015 at 01:43, Telmo Menezes wrote: > >> > You left out "traveling through time in a forward direction". >>> >>> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or >>> Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? >>

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 8 April 2015 at 03:41, John Clark wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > >>> >> you feel that you are the same person from day to day and year to >>> year, even if you know this is an illusion. >> >> >>> >>> >> How would things be different if this were n

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

LizR wrote: On 8 April 2015 at 05:41, John Clark > wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Stathis Papaioannou mailto:stath...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> you feel that you are the same person from day to day and year to year, even if you

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 8 April 2015 at 05:35, John Clark wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or >>> Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? >> >> >> > We have agree that both the W-man and the M-man are the H-man. >> > > Yes but y

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 8 April 2015 at 05:41, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > >> you feel that you are the same person from day to day and year to >>> year, even if you know this is an illusion. >>> >> > > >> How would things be different if this were not an

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 8 April 2015 at 01:43, Telmo Menezes wrote: > >>> >>> > You left out "traveling through time in a forward direction". >>> >> >> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or >> Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? >> > > Have you ever met anyone who doesn't feel like they

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Thursday, April 9, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 07 Apr 2015, at 20:48, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, April 8, 2015, Bruno Marchal > wrote: > >> >> On 07 Apr 2015, at 15:06, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, 7 April 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> >>

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 08 Apr 2015, at 02:40, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com> wrote: >> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? > Have you ever met anyone who doesn't feel like they are travelling t

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 07 Apr 2015, at 20:48, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Wednesday, April 8, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 07 Apr 2015, at 15:06, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Tuesday, 7 April 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 06 Apr 2015, at 01:22, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: I agree that if comp is true

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com > wrote: > >> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or >> Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? >> > > > Have you ever met anyone who doesn't feel like they are travelling > through time in a forward direction? >

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Wednesday, April 8, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 07 Apr 2015, at 15:06, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, 7 April 2015, Bruno Marchal > wrote: > >> >> On 06 Apr 2015, at 01:22, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> I agree that if comp is true then consciousness cannot supervene

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 07 Apr 2015, at 19:35, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? > We have agree that both the W-man and the M-man are the H-man. Yes but you didn't answer my

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> you feel that you are the same person from day to day and year to >> year, even if you know this is an illusion. >> > >> How would things be different if this were not an illusion? > > > > You are less the "same person" compared to

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or >> Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? > > > > We have agree that both the W-man and the M-man are the H-man. > Yes but you didn't answer my question and the answer is important beca

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 07 Apr 2015, at 15:06, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Tuesday, 7 April 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 06 Apr 2015, at 01:22, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: I agree that if comp is true then consciousness cannot supervene on physical activity, for the reasons in the MGA thread. OK. Thanks f

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

> > >> >> > You left out "traveling through time in a forward direction". >> > > Who is traveling through time in a forward direction, Mr. John Clark or > Mr. John Clark The Helsinki Man? > Have you ever met anyone who doesn't feel like they are travelling through time in a forward direction? >

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Tuesday, 7 April 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 06 Apr 2015, at 01:22, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > I agree that if comp is true then consciousness cannot supervene on > physical activity, for the reasons in the MGA thread. > > > OK. Thanks for making this clear. > > > > The only way out

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 06 Apr 2015, at 01:22, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Monday, April 6, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 05 Apr 2015, at 00:01, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sunday, April 5, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Apr 2015, at 00:03, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Saturday, April 4, 2015,

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 07 Apr 2015, at 01:57, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: >>> Assuming you're like me, you perceive yourself as a single entity travelling through time in the forward direction. >> You? Mr. John Clark The Moscow Man will perceive a single entity, and Mr. John

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 7 April 2015 at 11:58, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > >> > you feel that you are the same person from day to day and year to year, >> > even if you know this is an illusion. > > > How would things be different if this were not an illusion? You are less t

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > you feel that you are the same person from day to day and year to year, > even if you know this is an illusion. How would things be different if this were not an illusion? John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed t

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 7 April 2015 at 09:57, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > >>> Assuming you're like me, you perceive yourself as a single entity >>> travelling through time in the forward direction. >>> >>> >>> >> You? Mr. John Clark The Moscow Man will perceive a single

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: >>> Assuming you're like me, you perceive yourself as a single entity >>> travelling through time in the forward direction. >>> >> >> >> You? Mr. John Clark The Moscow Man will perceive a single entity, and >> Mr. John Clark the Washington Man will percei

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 11:04 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > If you take the MWI seriously, then you are open to the possibility that >> you are constantly being duplicated >> > > If the MWI is true then it's not a possibility it's a certainty > > >> > Ass

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Monday, April 6, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 05 Apr 2015, at 00:01, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On Sunday, April 5, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 04 Apr 2015, at 00:03, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, April 4, 2015, John Clark wrote: >> >>> >>> On Fri

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 05 Apr 2015, at 00:01, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sunday, April 5, 2015, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Apr 2015, at 00:03, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Saturday, April 4, 2015, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > Imagine the iterated duplication, the av

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sunday, April 5, 2015, Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > On 04 Apr 2015, at 00:03, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On Saturday, April 4, 2015, John Clark wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> > Imagine the iterated duplication, the average history in the diaries >>> obtai

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > If you take the MWI seriously, then you are open to the possibility that > you are constantly being duplicated > If the MWI is true then it's not a possibility it's a certainty > > Assuming you're like me, you perceive yourself as a single entity > t

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 04 Apr 2015, at 00:03, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Saturday, April 4, 2015, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > Imagine the iterated duplication, the average history in the diaries obtained contained histories like W (I was unable to predit that), W aga

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > You need only to agree that you survive (in both place if you want) That depends entirely on who Mr. You is. Assuming the variation of the thought experiment where the Helsinki Man is destroyed after the duplications then Mr. John Clark wi

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 6:42 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > "I" is a single entity travelling through time in the forward direction. >> > > If matter copying machines exist there would be nothing "single" about it, > Mr. I can split numerous times

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > "I" is a single entity travelling through time in the forward direction. > If matter copying machines exist there would be nothing "single" about it, Mr. I can split numerous times and can even split into 2 and then recombine back to one. And no

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 03 Apr 2015, at 19:17, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > Imagine the iterated duplication, the average history in the diaries obtained contained histories like W (I was unable to predit that), W again! Bruno Marchal keeps making the exact same error over

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Saturday, April 4, 2015, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > > Imagine the iterated duplication, the average history in the diaries >> obtained contained histories like W (I was unable to >> > predit that), W again! > > > Bruno Marchal keeps making the exac

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > Imagine the iterated duplication, the average history in the diaries > obtained contained histories like W (I was unable to > predit that), W again! Bruno Marchal keeps making the exact same error over and over and over again. Whatever is in the dia

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 02 Apr 2015, at 19:12, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> A thought experiment is not needed to realize there is a difference between "I" and "you". > It ias moe about the difference between the 3-you In other words "he". > and the 1-you. In other words "

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> A thought experiment is not needed to realize there is a difference >> between "I" and "you". > > > > It ias moe about the difference between the 3-you > In other words "he". > > and the 1-you. > In other words "I". > > Like, the 3-you are in bot

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 02 Apr 2015, at 00:18, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> You talk like if there was an insuperable difficulty brought by the duplication. >> Engineering difficulties only, scientific breakthroughs would not be required to make a matter duplicating machin

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 31 March 2015 at 15:28, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 6:32 PM, LizR wrote: > > > step zero is when you either do or don't agree that, if a doctor >> replaced your brain with an electronic version that exactly duplicated the >> computations (hypothetically) underlying your consci

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> You talk like if there was an insuperable difficulty brought by the > duplication. > >> Engineering difficulties only, scientific breakthroughs would not be > required to make a matter duplicating machine; however when such machines > become commonp

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 31 Mar 2015, at 04:28, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 6:32 PM, LizR wrote: > step zero is when you either do or don't agree that, if a doctor replaced your brain with an electronic version that exactly duplicated the computations (hypothetically) underlying your consciou

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 31 Mar 2015, at 04:20, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > You talk like if there was an insuperable difficulty brought by the duplication. Engineering difficulties only, scientific breakthroughs would not be required to make a matter duplicating machine; h

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 Mar 2015, at 19:02, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> That true. in the MWI we don't say that, but even if we did the statement would not be gibberish it would just turn out to be wrong. But in the copying machine world "I will see Moscow tomorrow" is

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 6:32 PM, LizR wrote: > step zero is when you either do or don't agree that, if a doctor replaced > your brain with an electronic version that exactly duplicated the > computations (hypothetically) underlying your consciousness, you would > survive the replacement > Well o

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > You talk like if there was an insuperable difficulty brought by the > duplication. Engineering difficulties only, scientific breakthroughs would not be required to make a matter duplicating machine; however when such machines become commonplace the E

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 31 March 2015 at 06:02, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > >> That true. in the MWI we don't say that, but even if we did the >>> statement would not be gibberish it would just turn out to be wrong. But in >>> the copying machine world "I will see Moscow tom

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 31 March 2015 at 05:47, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:13 PM, LizR wrote: > > >> Yes, do you think its working? I always wanted to be in a boy band and >>> I just learned that Zayn Malik is quitting One Direction and I'm trying to >>> get his >>> >> >> :-) >> >> > If that fails

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 31 March 2015 at 05:41, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 LizR wrote: > >> >>> > Bruno's point is that *if* consciousness is an outcome of computation, >> then it could in principle be duplicated. >> > > Of course it can be duplicated! Is that even supposed to be > controversial? If

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 31 March 2015 at 05:41, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 LizR wrote: > > > the MWI implies that our idea of what we are is wrong, >> > > It's not wrong it's just not the whole truth. What is? > > >> > or at least inadequate. >> > > Well... it's worked pretty adequately for thousands

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: > > So in Helsinki, if John Clark writes in the diary: "I predict that I > will live either WW or WM or MW or MM", then > John Clark doesn't understand Bruno Marchal's notation and doesn't know the difference between WW and WM, but it doesn't really mat

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 Mar 2015, at 05:45, LizR wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 15:20, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:10 PM, LizR wrote: But if it were a world of copying machines and John K Clark says "I" expect to see Moscow tomorrow then who the hell knows what "I" means. >The same is true of

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> That true. in the MWI we don't say that, but even if we did the >> statement would not be gibberish it would just turn out to be wrong. But in >> the copying machine world "I will see Moscow tomorrow" is equivalent to >> "klogknee will see Moscow tom

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:13 PM, LizR wrote: >> Yes, do you think its working? I always wanted to be in a boy band and I >> just learned that Zayn Malik is quitting One Direction and I'm trying to >> get his >> > > :-) > > > If that fails you could try for a job as the next Doctor Who. > That's

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 LizR wrote: >> No it is not the same. In the MWI if John Clark says "tomorrow I will >> see the electron spin up" then tomorrow there is a clear way for Liz to >> determine if the prediction was correct or not because the the laws pf >> physics guarantee that Liz will find

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 Mar 2015, at 07:40, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 29 March 2015 at 05:31, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2015-03-28 19:04 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes : On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 6:01 PM, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 27, 2015

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 Mar 2015, at 04:20, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:10 PM, LizR wrote: But if it were a world of copying machines and John K Clark says "I" expect to see Moscow tomorrow then who the hell knows what "I" means. >The same is true of the MWI. No it is not the same. In the

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 Mar 2015, at 03:10, LizR wrote: On 29 March 2015 at 10:45, John Clark wrote: But if it were a world of copying machines and John K Clark says "I" expect to see Moscow tomorrow then who the hell knows what "I" means. The same is true of the MWI. We don't say "I expect to see both spi

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

Graziano's theory of consciousness On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Quentin explained you politely the errors you made Politely?!! I alluded to the lengthy explanations that Quentin Jason, myself, even Brent, tried on John Clark, some years ago, on step 3. He

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 29 Mar 2015, at 19:42, John Clark wrote: (already answered/commented) > You keep oscillating between too much simple and pompous (but correct) and "incorrect" or "imprecise" Well, that's what happens with a theory where the true parts are obvious and the non-obvious parts are no

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 29 Mar 2015, at 19:47, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Quentin explained you politely the errors you made Politely?!! Yes. His explanations were clear, polite and definite (three years ago). He eventually get nervous only when you repeat

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy < multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 11:57 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >>> > Ok... Well now everybody can see you as you really are, >>> >> And I'm perfectly satisf

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 March 2015 at 18:40, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > I was referring to the entire exchange, not just one side. It doesn't > directly physically hurt anyone to be rude or abusive, but it's better > not to be rude or abusive. > > It may cause emotional damage. In extreme cases of cyber-bullyi

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 29 March 2015 at 05:31, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> 2015-03-28 19:04 GMT+01:00 Telmo Menezes : >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 6:01 PM, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Stathis Papaioannou w

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 March 2015 at 15:20, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:10 PM, LizR wrote: > > But if it were a world of copying machines and John K Clark says "I" >>> expect to see Moscow tomorrow then who the hell knows what "I" means. >>> >> >> >The same is true of the MWI. >> > > No it is n

RE: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 6:14 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness On 30 March 2015 at 08:40, John Clark wrote: On Sun

RE: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 7:31 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 'Chris de Mor

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Can you dance? Can you shake your ass? > Are you able to deliver (on demand) “spontaneous” and convincing innocent > teenage heartthrob looks [...] Do you look like you could be sixteen year

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:10 PM, LizR wrote: But if it were a world of copying machines and John K Clark says "I" expect >> to see Moscow tomorrow then who the hell knows what "I" means. >> > > >The same is true of the MWI. > No it is not the same. In the MWI if John Clark says "tomorrow I will

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 11:57 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > >> > Ok... Well now everybody can see you as you really are, >> > And I'm perfectly satisfied with that because that is who I really am. > What? Chief of equine relations of everything list? No

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 30 March 2015 at 08:40, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < > everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > > Come on John – are you trying to be cute? > > > Yes, do you think its working? I always wanted to be in a boy band and I > just learned t

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 29 March 2015 at 10:45, John Clark wrote: > > But if it were a world of copying machines and John K Clark says "I" > expect to see Moscow tomorrow then who the hell knows what "I" means. > The same is true of the MWI. We don't say "I expect to see both spin up and spin down", or "I expect the

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness--

I'm sure John Donne would agree. -- 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 ema

RE: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: > Come on John – are you trying to be cute? Yes, do you think its working? I always wanted to be in a boy b

RE: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 10:47 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Bruno Ma

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Come on John – are you trying to be cute? Yes, do you think its working? I always wanted to be in a boy band and I just learned that Zayn Malik is quitting One Direction and I'm trying to g

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Quentin explained you politely the errors you made Politely?!! 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 email

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Bruno starts talking about "The 1P", but there is no such thing as "The >> 1P" there is only "A 1P" > > > > The 1p is usually meant for the notion of 1p. > As if we didn't have enough ambiguity already! Who's 1P?? > We have agrred that both reconsi

RE: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote: > John, Clearly – you must admit -- there is a certain qualitative difference > between calling someone a Liar

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 28 Mar 2015, at 23:41, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > Please explain then logically how it's different from the simple duplication experiment No, there would be no point. I've already explained my reasoning over and over and over again and your rebut

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 28 Mar 2015, at 21:24, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > In the Answer this: of MWI, you're about to perform an electron spin measurement experiment. Before the experiment, the experimenter is asked what is the probability he will measure spin up? What wo

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On 28 Mar 2015, at 17:40, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > You are saying that step 3 is trivial, so you admit that it is correct No. The first 2 steps are trivialities dressed up in pompous language, but in step 3 Bruno doesn't know what he's talking abou

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > Ok... Well now everybody can see you as you really are, > And I'm perfectly satisfied with that because that is who I really am. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

Ok... Well now everybody can see you as you really are, I've tried one more time, it was pointless. Quentin Le 28 mars 2015 23:41, "John Clark" a écrit : > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > *> Please explain then* *logically* *how it's different from the simple >> duplication ex

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: *> Please explain then* *logically* *how it's different from the simple > duplication experiment* > No, there would be no point. I've already explained my reasoning over and over and over again and your rebuttal is always exactly the same, "Liar Clark

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > John, Clearly – you must admit -- there is a certain qualitative > difference between calling someone a Liar and calling someone a Horse > Fucker. Yes I could not agree with you more, they

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Telmo Menezes wrote: > > There is the man who remembers being in Brussels, and is now in > Washington. There is the man who remembers being in Brussels and is now in > Moscow. Both men share the exact same memores prior to Brussels. > OK. > > Both man remember not being

Re: Michael Graziano's theory of consciousness

2015-03-28 21:24 GMT+01:00 John Clark : > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > In the Answer this: of MWI, you're about to perform an electron spin >> measurement experiment. Before the experiment, the experimenter is asked >> what is the probability he will measure spin up? What wo

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >