Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-15 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 10 Feb 2017, at 21:31, MJH wrote: On Thursday, 9 February 2017 15:50:37 UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hi people, I think that this post is pure trolling. John comes back with questions already answered. Any one can find the answers in the previews posts. If anyone else has a question on

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-10 Thread MJH
On Thursday, 9 February 2017 15:50:37 UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Hi people, > > I think that this post is pure trolling. John comes back with questions > already answered. > > Any one can find the answers in the previews posts. > > If anyone else has a question on this, please ask, or

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-09 Thread John Clark
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​ > Hi people, > ​ ​ > I think that this post is pure trolling. > ​Of course, anyone who disagrees with the great Bruno Marchal can't be sincere and can only be a troll. > ​> ​ > John comes back with questions already

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-09 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi people, I think that this post is pure trolling. John comes back with questions already answered. Any one can find the answers in the previews posts. If anyone else has a question on this, please ask, or comment, but in this present case we are looping. Does anyone else have a

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-08 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 4:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>>>​ >>> from the third person points of view that he can have about himself, or >>> better himselves. >> >> > ​>> ​ >> No idea what that means, none whatsoever.​ > > > ​> ​ > It means that the guy can say to his friend:

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-08 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 08 Feb 2017, at 03:11, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>​​>​ Abandon the assumption that "he" will have a unique successor because it's just not true anymore. ​> ​Right, from the third person points of view that he can have

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-07 Thread John Clark
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > ​>​ >> ​>​ >> Abandon the assumption that "he" will have a unique successor because >> it's just not true anymore. > > > ​> ​ > Right, from the third person points of view that he can have about > himself, or better

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 07 Feb 2017, at 04:09, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​ ​ ​>> ​I am right here in Helsinki right now, ​> ​OK. ​>> ​in the future what one and only one city will I see after the experiment ​is over? ​> ​That is the question.

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 06 Feb 2017, at 20:28, Brent Meeker wrote: On 2/6/2017 4:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: because, by computationalism, we know that each copies will feel seeing only one city. How does computationalism alone guarantee that? It seems that it relies on a lot of physical assumptions about

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-06 Thread Brent Meeker
On 2/6/2017 4:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: because, by computationalism, we know that each copies will feel seeing only one city. How does computationalism alone guarantee that? It seems that it relies on a lot of physical assumptions about the speed of light and the physical

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-06 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Feb 2017, at 19:15, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 3:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​​You were correct when ​​w​hen ​you said "he is duplicated", therefore while in H any question of the form "what will he...?" is meaningless because "he" is

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-02-04 Thread John Clark
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 3:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​ >> ​You were correct when ​ >> ​w​ >> hen ​you said "he is duplicated", therefore while in H any question of >> the form "what will he...?" is meaningless because "he" is duplicated and >> the personal pronoun is

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-01-31 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 31 Jan 2017, at 00:01, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​You do have agree that the three people are the same H person. But he is duplicated and become the HW in W and becomes the HM in M. ​You were correct when ​​when

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-01-30 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​> ​ > You do have agree that the three people are the same H person. But he is > duplicated and become the HW in W and becomes the HM in M. > ​You were correct when ​ ​when ​you said "he is duplicated", therefore while

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-01-30 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 30 Jan 2017, at 17:44, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​Where it says things like "in the people duplicating experiment *YOU* can not predict what one and only one city *YOU* will see after *YOU* after have been

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-01-30 Thread John Clark
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​ >> Where it says things like "in the people duplicating experiment **YOU** >> can not predict what one and only one city **YOU** will see after **YOU** >> after have been duplicated and thus there are now 2 of **YOU**

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-01-30 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Jan 2017, at 23:37, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​​And every one of those 700 pages contains personal pronouns with no clear referent; ​> ​Where? ​Where it says​ things like​ "in the people duplicating

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-01-28 Thread John Clark
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​ >> ​And every one of those 700 pages contains personal pronouns with no >> clear referent; > > > ​> ​ > Where? > ​Where it says ​ things like​ "in the people duplicating experiment **YOU** can not predict what one

Re: An invisible amoral mindless metaphorical form of arithmetic, aka "God"

2017-01-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 26 Jan 2017, at 21:12, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​>> ​I don't need to explain how matter that obeys the laws of physics is able to perform calculations,​ I need only observe that is can. ​> ​No, you cannot observe