Peter Jones writes:

> Errmm.. if by "recover" we are able to replay them as
> conscious (re)experiences. The memory-trace need
> only contain time-stamps indicating the order
> and timing of the contents of the experience. The
> total structure of time-stamped-stored-experience
> can co-exist simultaneously, just as a the frames
> of a movie stored on a shelf co-exist simultaneously.
> The stored experience is not conscious in itself
> any more than the stored movie involves any (ilusion of) motion.
> In both cases, that comes in with the recovery.

That's not an accurate analogy. For a start, a film in the can is not 
equivalent to a film on the screen sliced up into frames because there 
is no projector and no screen in the can. Then there is the fact that if 
you did project one frame in one cinema, the next frame in another 
cinema, and so on, the analogy would still not hold because it leaves 
out the observer. To make the analogy work, you would have to show 
one frame to an observer in one cinema, suspend his consciousness 
while you move him and the film to another cinema, show him another 
frame, supend his consciousness again while you move to a third cinema 
for the third frame, and so on. The observer would then see the whole 
film, and if the cinemas were identical, would not even know he had been 
moved, other than due to mere technical problems.

Stathis Papaioannou
Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail.
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