On Nov 24, 2008, at 11:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > If your argument were not merely convincing but definitive, then I > would not need to make MGA 3 for showing it is ridiculous to endow the > projection of a movie of a computation with consciousness (in real > "space-time", like the physical supervenience thesis asked for).
Ok, I think I'm following you now. You're saying that I'm failing to provide a definitive argument showing that it is ridiculous to endow the projection of a movie of a computation with consciousness. (Or, in my alternate thought experiment, I'm failing to provide a *definitive* reason why it's ridiculous to endow the "playing back" of the previously-computed "block universe" with consciousness.) I concur - my arguments are convincing, but not definitive. If MGA 3 (or MGA 4, etc.) is definitive, or even just more convincing, so much the better. Please proceed! -- Kory --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
