On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: >> I don't need a proof because I have something better, I have direct >> experience of the subjective. >> > > > Nice for you. >
Indeed. > But that does not invalidate the point that you can't prove this to an > other person, > I can't even prove that there is another person that I could present a potential proof to. >> Problem? What's the problem? If I do not believe in your subjective >> experience, as you say above, then I certainly don't need to explain it. >> And if I do believe in your subjective experience then I can say it was >> caused by the way matter interacts (which can be fully described by >> information) just as I already know from direct experience that my >> subjective experience is caused. >> > > > That mundane explanation might be locally valid, but your own idea that > consciousness is not localized Yes. Do you find a contradiction in that? I don't. > Indeed, you are presently delocalized into an infinity of computations, > And if Everett is correct there are a infinite number of Bruno Marchals , that would certainly be odd but where is the contradiction? >> And if I also believe that consciousness is fundamental, that is to say >> a sequence of "What caused that?" questions is not infinite and >> consciousness comes at the end, then there is nothing more that can be said >> on the subject. >> > > Yes, but you have to invoke some non-comp to localize yourself in some > unique reality > Fine, then feel free to "invoke some non-comp" or invoke more "comp" if that floats your boat, I no longer care. I've given up trying to find a consistent definition of your silly little word "comp" that is used on this list and nowhere else. Your endless homemade acronyms that you pretend every educated person should know get tiresome too. > once you believe that your consciousness is invariant for some "digital > transformation" > I do believe that. > then you can begin to understand that we have to justify the physical > from modalities associated to that those digital transformations. > Although it doesn't necessarily follow the digital transformation of consciousness is perfectly consistent with the matter in the desk I'm pounding my hand on right now as simply being a subroutine in the johnkclak program, and the same is true of the matter in my hand. > Somehow, you just say that you are not interested in the mind-body > problem. > Well, nobody around here has said anything very interesting about the mind-body problem. And if the sequence of "what caused that?" questions are not infinite than after a certain point there just isn't anything more of interest to say about the mind-body problem. > Like you said once, we can't predict, in Helsinki, W or M, and that's > all. > I can't predict the answer because you haven't precisely formulated what the question is. > I stay in the 3p, because in UDA we use only the most superficial aspect > of the first person > I've looked yet again but I still don't see it: http://uda.varsity.com/ 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 emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
