Thanks for providing me with even more motivations for MGA 3. I will try to do it as soon as possible. It could time because I am hesitating on the best way to proceed. I know that what is obvious for some is not for others, and vice versa ... That is why we do proof, to met universal criteria.
Bruno Le 25-nov.-08, à 11:25, Russell Standish a écrit : > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:28:45PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> Le 24-nov.-08, à 02:39, Russell Standish a écrit : >> >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 03:59:02PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I would side with Kory that a looked up recording of conscious >>>>> activity is not conscious. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I agree with you. The point here is just that MEC+MAT implies it. >>>> >>> >>> This I don't follow. I would have thought it implies the opposite. >> >> >> MGA 1 shows that MEC+MAT implies lucky Alice is conscious (during the >> exam). OK? >> MGA 2 shows that MEC+MAT implies Alice is dreaming (and thus >> conscious) >> when the film is projected. OK? > > Right - I think we had a breakdown in communication. I thought you > were asserting the opposite > >> I take the "looked recording" as identical (with respect to the >> reasoning) with a projection of the movie. >> >> Of course I don't believe that a projection of a filmed computation is >> conscious 'qua computatio". It is so absurd that sometimes I end the >> Movie Graph Argument here. I mean I consider this equivalent to false, >> and thus as enough for showing COMP+MAT implies false. >> MGA 3 is intended for those who believes that the movie can be >> conscious qua computatio. >> >> Bruno >> > > The movie, in this case, is a very precise recording of the states of > all of Alice's neurons and their interactions. Why wouldn't it be > conscious? Someone once said to you "don't confuse the territory with > the map" - and you very sagely asked "what if the map is so detailed > it is indistinguishable from the territory". > > A popular representation of the universe is a block universe, where > all events exist in a 4D static representation that is forever > timeless. A block universe contains conscious entities, who perceive > time etc., at least according to your usual die hard materialist, > don't you think? How does a block universe differ from your movie > though? > > Note it is important not to rely on our intuition here. None of us has > experience of movies with the level of resolution been discussed > here. High definition movies are distinctly lame by comparison. > > I guess I'll need MGA3! > > > -- > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) > Mathematics > UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
