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) Mathematics 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
