On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:47:46PM +1100, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I would also predict that a UD reified in our universe would be like
> >> that...'not much' consciousness (the consciousness of the computer =
> >> that
> >> of which it is made, not that of the program). There are no phenomena
> >> reified as a result of the UD operating. The only phenomena happening
> >> are the machinations of the hardware of the UD.
> >>
> >
> > Fair enough, but this is a direct contradiction with the assumption of
> > computationalism.
> This is a 'assume comp' playground only? I am up for not assuming
> anything.....but if computationalism is actually false then it becomes a
> religion or a club or something.

Not at all. I don't even subscribe to computationalism most days, but
it is a powerful metaphor for reasoning. Nevertheless it is important
to know in any argument if you assume it or not. Otherwise you may
have the sort of argument:

  If computationalism is false, then I show that computationalism is false.

which is not especially interesting.

A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia                                http://www.hpcoders.com.au

 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