David Nyman wrote: > Tom Caylor wrote: > > S_p > > can be expressed by a finite number, since the substitution itself can > > be expressed by a finite number (whatever is written on the tape/CD or > > other storage/transmitting device). > > Does your 'interpretation' of 'Yes doctor' leave open all assumptions > about actual *instantiation* of S_p? You refer above to the 'tape/CD or > other storage/transmitting device'. Is an additional act of faith > required such that we trust the doctor not merely to leave S_p to > gather dust on a shelf? Or, if he does cause the instantiation of S_p > (even assuming it to be equivalent to S_c) in terms of some > unconstrained choice among arbitrarily many machine 'architectures' > (electronic, hydraulic, mechanical, Platonic, you-name-it) I am to > further trust that my experience will remain invariant to the actual > physical behaviour thus enacted? Or is the assumption of YD within a > 'comp' that additionally assumes AR+CT supposed to subsume all the > above issues, and if so why?
Suppose you were faced with two Doctors: Dr 1 promises to reproduce you approximately in a robotic body that can interact with the environment. Dr 2 promises to reproduce you exactly, and leave the resulting tape gathering dust... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
