Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> Hi,
> Le Dimanche 26 Novembre 2006 12:43, Colin Geoffrey Hales a écrit :
> > Note: Scientists, by definition:
> > a) are doing science on the world external to them
> > b) inhabit a universe of exquisite novelty
> >    ...or there'd be no need for them!
> Please note: Zombies by definition:
> a) are functionnaly equivalent to what you called 'scientists'.
> b) are undistinguishable from what you called 'scientists', because if they
> were it would be a property that would easily discriminate them.
> The zombie point is a I'll say one more time a point to show non-sense in
> dualistic view... what it means is either that a property of the natural/real
> world is not copiable/replicable and that copying all physical/computational
> properties is not enough, there is still left the PC(what you call phenomenal
> consciousness which could be shorten to consciousness) which discriminate
> zombie from the scientist.
> Taking your point is this:
> Definition:
> Zombie can't do science because they don't have PC.
> Scientist can do science because they have PC
> Conclusion:
> Zombie can't do science because they don't have PC.
> So zombie can't be a scientist.

I think his premiss is:
PC is a function.

>From that alone it follows that you can't have
zombies, but zombies must be functional duplicated, but, in lacking
PC, they would lack a function. So they would both be functionally
identical and functionally different -- reductio ad absurdum.

But the premiss is arbitrary

 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