Well, I think I'm OK with that! Consciousness exists in the Everything as an
implied causal process - and that implication embeds it within causal
frameworks. In cases where causality is broken but its representation
exists, I would say that maybe the gaps are filled in by the 'full'
consciousnesses as expressed elsewhere in the Everything.

It seems a little odd, but what the hell.

Say you're split in two (doesn't matter if it's in the same universe or in
different ones), and having a conversation with someone. In one case, it's a
normal person, and in another a non-consciousness simulacrum with identical
responses etc.. If you don't know which one you're dealing with, then
perhaps the consciousness of the real person is in some kind of dominant
superposition over the fake.

Of course, this would imply that everything that could possibly, even in
concept, have some hidden consciousness behind it does so.

2008/11/25 Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Michael Rosefield wrote:
> > I don't know about anyone else, but with the volume of mail we're
> > getting lately, I've been skimming things and have started to lose the
> > plot completely.
> >
> > So, perhaps it's time for a fresh start. My idea of where we are is this:
> >
> > Physical causality is just a 'linkage' between states - it's nothing
> > more than a rule for going from one place to another (be it a discrete
> > jump or a continuous trajectory), and taking a block view of time it can
> > be represented not as a distinction between states and links but just as
> > states.
> But that's what creates the antinomy when you suppose the sequence of
> states is
> created by a random number generator or replaying a recording.  If there's
> nothing to causal linkage except order of states then there's no
> distinction
> between the randomly generated sequence and the causal sequence except the
> former is extremely improbable.
> Brent
> >Hence any phenomena relying on a causal process is also
> > encapsulated by a static snapshot. Thence, consciousness is not created
> > by the universe, but merely implies/creates its own universe/causal
> > context around it.
> >
> > Damn, I try and make something make more sense and end up typing
> > confusing babble like that!
> >
> > --------------------------
> > - Did you ever hear of "The Seattle Seven"?
> > - Mmm.
> > - That was me... and six other guys.
> >
> > >
> >

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 

Reply via email to