Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Well, my friend, I am no Georg Cantor, but I am of a like-mind to him. What I have discerned, is an important insight that indeed resolves the chasm, and does, as you point out, make things mightily more complicated. There is level of complication that has been with us all the time, but which we

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Jamie, wise words, but no cigar here. For a "RE-Evaluation" I have insufficient knowledge even in the "E" - to compare it into a "RE-". Statistical is different: I question the topical meaning, as being just a 'model'-related idea (in MY sense: as a limited topical fraction of the totality within b

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

John M, et al, It is a fact of existential experiencing that minds are typically so innured to their millieu and environmental encounters that 'alternative interpretations' are overlooked and missed to appreciation and understanding. --- When it became apparent to me that QM -and- Relativity

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

It's getting such and sucher - the multiple, back-and-forth gets dizzying. So I will copy certain sentences of the "Stathistical" discussion for reflection.-Below is the orig.Maze. John --- > JM earlier: What else can we 'imagine'? Ideational -- of whom? Mine? > Yours?

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/31/07, John Mikes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The non-standard part of Bruno's comp, as I see it, is to accept that > > computation can lead to thought but to reject the physical supervenience > > theory, i.e. that computation requires certain physical processes to > > take place in order to "

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

(s): > > > > - Original Message - > > *From:* Stathis Papaioannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com > > *Sent:* Sunday, March 25, 2007 7:34 PM > > *Subject:* Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter? > > > > &

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

y, March 25, 2007 7:34 PM > *Subject:* Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter? > > > > > On 3/25/07, Mark Peaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > SKIP - Sorry, Mark, this goes to Stathis, who wrote: > > > > *-SP: > > > Standard computation

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis: let me keep only your reply-part and ask my question(s): - Original Message - From: Stathis Papaioannou To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 7:34 PM Subject: Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter? On 3/25/07, Mark Peaty <[EM

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/28/07, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Le 26-mars-07, à 01:34, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit : > > > Standard computationalism is just the theory that your brain could be > > replaced with an appropriately configured digital computer and you > > would not only act the same, you

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Le 26-mars-07, à 01:34, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit : > Standard computationalism is just the theory that your brain could be > replaced with an appropriately configured digital computer and you > would not only act the same, you would also feel the same. Bruno goes > on to show that this ent

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Le 25-mars-07, à 15:13, Mark Peaty a écrit : > > I hope you guys will forgive my irreverence, but in the last > couple of hours for the first time I have managed to read this > thread to here. Having done so, and in the spirit of this > everything-list wherein it is assumed everything is not onl

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/22/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > No. I'm talking about a sort of program/data division - which I > recognize is arbitrary in computer program - but I think may have an > analogue in brains. Whe

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/25/07, Mark Peaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I hope you guys will forgive my irreverence, but in the last > couple of hours for the first time I have managed to read this > thread to here. Having done so, and in the spirit of this > everything-list wherein it is assumed everything is not

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

I hope you guys will forgive my irreverence, but in the last couple of hours for the first time I have managed to read this thread to here. Having done so, and in the spirit of this everything-list wherein it is assumed everything is not only possible but _will_ happen and indeed may already h

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/22/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No. I'm talking about a sort of program/data division - which I recognize > is arbitrary in computer program - but I think may have an analogue in > brains. When I write a simulation of a system of ODEs the time evolution of > the ODEs define t

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/22/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > > > On 3/22/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/22/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > > > On 3/22/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > wrote: > > > > > > John M wrote: > > > Stathis and Brent: > > > > > > ineresting and hard-to-object senti

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/22/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > John M wrote: > > Stathis and Brent: > > > > ineresting and hard-to-object sentiments. > > Would it not make sense to write instead of > > "we

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/22/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > John M wrote: > > Stathis and Brent: > > > > ineresting and hard-to-object sentiments. > > Would it not make sense to write instead of > > "we are" (thing-wise) - > > the term less static, rather process-wise: > > "We do" (in whatever actio

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On Wednesday 21 March 2007 17:46:32 Brent Meeker wrote: > John M wrote: > > Stathis and Brent: > > > > ineresting and hard-to-object sentiments. > > Would it not make sense to write instead of > > "we are" (thing-wise) - > > the term less static, rather process-wise: > > "We do" (in whatever acti

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

John M wrote: > Stathis and Brent: > > ineresting and hard-to-object sentiments. > Would it not make sense to write instead of > "we are" (thing-wise) - > the term less static, rather process-wise: > "We do" (in whatever action)? > > John M That's part of what I'm struggling with. ISTM that

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 3:23 PM Subject: Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter? Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/21/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Unconscious factors affecting our sense of continuity of identity must > > do it through affecting conscious factors. > > That would follow if we were always conscious of our sense of continuity > of identity, but I don't think we are. I ma

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

dn't use insecticide here." Brent Meeker > > - Original Message ----- > *From:* Stathis Papaioannou <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com> > *Sent:* Monday, March 19,

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 7:13 PM Subject: Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter? On 3/20/07, John M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Stathis: it seems you apply some hard 'Occami\sation' to consckiousness: as I see you consider it as 'being consciou

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/20/07, John M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Stathis: > it seems you apply some hard 'Occami\sation' to consckiousness: as I see > you consider it as 'being conscious - vs. unconscious'. The physiological > (mediacal?) way. > In my experience from reading and intenrnet-discussing Ccness for o

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

ologistic version has its audience, but so has the wider sense as well. John M - Original Message - From: Stathis Papaioannou To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 5:54 AM Subject: Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter? On 3/19/07, Brent Meeker &

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

order. John M - Original Message - From: Jason To: Everything List Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 3:50 PM Subject: Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter? > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > I'm not sure what you mean by "the order of your current obs

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/19/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > wrote: > > > > > > >If there are OMs which don't > > > remember being you then they are not going to be part of yo

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > >If there are OMs which don't > > remember being you then they are not going to be part of your > stream of > > consciousness. > > There's the rub

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/19/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >If there are OMs which don't > > remember being you then they are not going to be part of your stream of > > consciousness. > > There's the rub. Almost all my OMs *do not* include consciously > remembering being me (or anyone). And if you su

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/19/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Each observer moment lives only transiently and is not in > telepathic > > > communication wi

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > > Each observer moment lives only transiently and is not in telepathic > > communication with any other OMs, whether related to it or not. The > > effect (

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/19/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Each observer moment lives only transiently and is not in telepathic > > communication with any other OMs, whether related to it or not. The > > effect (or illusion) of continuity of consciousness is adequately > > explained by each OM remem

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

> Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > I'm not sure what you mean by "the order of your current observer moment". > > > Stathis Papaioannou I see how my wording was confusing. What I meant by "order" was order vs. disorder, e.g. we are experiencing a well structured observer moment as opposed to whit

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 3/18/07, *Jason* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > Every conscious perspective within the UD could be said to have some > statistical measure in relation to other conscious perspectives. > Which is to say, some experienc

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

regularity of...(and I refuse the convert the experienced thing into 'regularity' as a 1st.). Regards John M - Original Message - From: Jason To: Everything List Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 11:25 PM Subject: Statistical Measure, does it matter? Every consciou

Re: Statistical Measure, does it matter?

On 3/18/07, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Every conscious perspective within the UD could be said to have some > statistical measure in relation to other conscious perspectives. > Which is to say, some experiences occur with a greater frequency than > others. However, I am wondering if any use

Statistical Measure, does it matter?

Every conscious perspective within the UD could be said to have some statistical measure in relation to other conscious perspectives. Which is to say, some experiences occur with a greater frequency than others. However, I am wondering if any useful conclusions can be made from this as Self Sampl