Brent Meeker wrote:
> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> > Peter Jones writes:
> >
> >
> >>>That's what I'm saying, but I certainly don't think everyone agrees with 
> >>>me on the list, and
> >>>I'm not completely decided as to which of the three is more absurd: every 
> >>>physical system
> >>>implements every conscious computation, no physical system implements any 
> >>>conscious
> >>>computation (they are all implemented non-physically in Platonia), or the 
> >>>idea that a
> >>>computation can be conscious in the first place.
> >>
> >>
> >>You haven't made it clear why you don't accept that every physical
> >>system
> >>implements one computation, whether it is a
> >>conscious computation or not. I don't see what
> >>contradicts it.
> >
> >
> > Every physical system does implement every computation, in a trivial sense, 
> > as every rock
> > is a hammer and a doorstop and contains a bust of Albert Einstein inside 
> > it. Those three aspects
> > of rocks are not of any consequence unless there is someone around to 
> > appreciate them.
> > Similarly, if the vibration of atoms in a rock under some complex mapping 
> > are calculating pi
> > that is not of any consequence unless someone goes to the trouble of 
> > determining that mapping,
> > and even then it wouldn't be of any use as a general purpose computer 
> > unless you built another
> > general purpose computer to dynamically interpret the vibrations (which 
> > does not mean the rock
> > isn't doing the calculation without this extra computer).
> I think there are some constraints on what the rock must be doing in order 
> that it
> can be said to be calculating pi instead of the interpreting computer.  For 
> example
> if the rock states were just 1,0,1,0,1,0... then there are several arguments 
> based on
> for example information theory that would rule out that being a computation 
> of pi.

Stathis would no doubt say you just need a dictionary that says;

Let the first 1 be 3
let the first 0 be 1
let the second 1 be 4
let the second 0 be 1
let the third 1 be 5
let the third 0 be 9

But there are good AIT reasons for saying that all the complexity is
in the dictionary

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

Reply via email to