Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> > On 3/19/07, *Brent Meeker* < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>> wrote:
> > > Each observer moment lives only transiently and is not in
> > > communication with any other OMs, whether related to it or
> not. The
> > > effect (or illusion) of continuity of consciousness is
> > > explained by each OM remembering past experiences. These past
> > > experiences need not have happened at all, let alone
> happened in the
> > > remembered order and in the remembered body.
> > It seems you are simultaneously asserting that an OM is an
> > experience of one thing and contrarily that it includes
> memories of
> > past experiences. That makes it a compound. If an OM can
> be such
> > a compound then it can include memory of which OM was
> > before it and OMs will form a chain (as suggested by Bertrand
> > Russell) and define mental "time". Under comp this chain may
> > (and merge) but it would not include isolated OMs that didn't
> > include memory of a predecessor.
> > The memories of past experiences are called real memories if they
> > in the usual causally linked fashion, in the same brain. However, in
> > theory they could be false memories. There is no way to tell, from
> > within a particular moment of experience, whether remembered moments
> > occurred in the remembered order or even occurred at all in the
> real world.
> > Stathis Papaioannou
> I understand that. But if OMs are isolated, unitary experiences,
> then there is no way to explain 'consistent continuation' as in
> Bruno's comp. OMs that don't happen to be remembering some other OM
> are disconnected and are equally consistent and inconsistent with
> any other OM. They aren't able to create even the illusion of
> Sure: continuity is created by memory.
But I don't see how.
>If there are OMs which don't
> remember being you then they are not going to be part of your stream of
There's the rub. Almost all my OMs *do not* include consciously remembering
being me (or anyone). And if you suppose there is an *unconscious* memory
component of an OM then there's a problem with what it means to have an
unconscious part of consciousness.
>they might be part of someone else's stream of
> consciousness, or just stand in isolation, with no future or past. I
> imagine this is what it would be like in the end stages of dementia.
> Stathis Papaioannou
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at