On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't say that they are rare, I say they don't make any sense. A > big difference. > > I say that every possible event is perceived to happen, and so nothing > is more or less rare than anything else. There are only things that > are rare in your experience. They are not rare in an absolute sense. > > Why do I say this? Because I think that platonism is the best > explanation for conscious experience, and the above view is (I think) > the logical conclusion of that platonic view of reality. > >
I am not sure that the measure problem can be so easily abandoned/ignored. Assuming every Observer Moment had has an equal measure, then the random/white-noise filled OMs should vastly outnumber the ordered and sensible OMs. Though I ever only have one OM to go by, the fact I was able to maintain a non-random/non-white-noise filled OMs long enough to compose this post should serve as some level of evidence that all OMs are not weighted equally. Bruno has suggested that computationalism is a candidate for answering the measure problem in a testable way. However there may be other ways to answer it by considering platonic objects, for example counting the umber of paths to a state, that is how often it reappears as a substructure of other platonic objects, etc. Whether or not this is testable is another question, but whether the ultimate explanation of consciousness is computation or information, I feel that measure is important. Jason --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
