Le 30-juin-06, à 20:43, Brent Meeker a écrit :

> Bruno Marchal wrote:
> There is no false 1-memories. Only an association between some
> 1-memory and some 3-reality can be false. If someone succeeds in
> implementing correctly (more than just coherently) false beliefs (like
> I am Napoleon just after Waterloo), then I will believe correctly that
> I am Napoleon and that I have just lose a battle, almost by
> definition. I will have to go in an asylum, sure, but my
> 1-memory of the past is correct given that they have been correctly
> implemented.
> =======================================================
> What does "correctly implemented" mean?  Doesn't it reference some 3rd 
> person standard of "correct"?

Yes. Like in a plane with an altimeter telling the plane is 1 miles 
above the sea, when the plane actually  *is* 1 miles above the sea 
(with respect to its most probable relative computation history).

"Correctly implemented" means---assuming comp and thus assuming the 
existence of the substitution level---that the doctor has luckily 
implemented the "Napoleon's software" at that correct level (or below).

I could have said:

> 1-memory of the past is correct given that they have been correctly
> implemented, *by assumption*.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to