2009/5/8 Torgny Tholerus <tor...@dsv.su.se>:
> Bruno Marchal skrev:
>> On 07 May 2009, at 18:29, Torgny Tholerus wrote:
>>> Bruno Marchal skrev:
>>>> you are human, all right?
>>> I look exactly as a human. When you look at me, you will not be
>>> able to know if I am a human or a zombie, because I behave exacly like a
>> So you believe that human are not zombie, and you agree that you are
>> not human.
>> Where do you come from? Vega? Centaur?
> I come from Stockholm, Sweden. I was constructed by my parents. In
> reality I think that all humans are zombies, but because I am a polite
> person, I do not tell the other zombies that they are zombies. I do not
> want to hurt the other zombies by telling them the truth.
If we are zombie... you cannot hurt us, a zombie can't be hurt, a
zombie is a thing, a zombie is totally like a rock from it's inner
live pov. A zombie can't think, a zombie can't "behave like" from its
point of view because a zombie has no point of view.
>>> Yes it is right. There is no infinity of natural numbers. But the
>>> natural numbers are UNLIMITED, you can construct as many natural
>>> numbers as you want. But how many numbers you construct, the number of
>>> numbers will always be finite. You can never construct an infinite number
>>> natural numbers.
>> This is no more ultrafinitism. Just the usal finitism or intuitionism.
>> It seems I recall you have had a stronger view on this point.
>> Ontologically I am neutral on this question. With comp I don't need
>> any actual infinity in the third person ontology. Infinities are not
>> avoidable from inside, at least when the inside view begins some self-
>> reflexion studies.
> I was an ultrafinitist before, but I have changed my mind. Now I accept
> that you can say that the natural numbers are unlimited. I only deny
> actual infinities. The set of all natural numbers are always finite,
> but you can always increase the set of all natural number by adding more
> natural numbers to it.
Then it's not the set of *all* natural numbers. You do nothing by
adding a number... you don't create numbers by writing them down, you
don't invent properties about them, it's absurd... especially for a
>>> An ordinary computer can never be arithmetically unsound.
>> ? (this seems to me plainly false, unless you mean "perfect" for
>> "ordinary". But computers can be as unsound as you and me.
>> There is no vaccine against soundness: all computers can be unsound
>> soo or later. there is no perfect computer. Most gods are no immune,
>> you have to postulate the big unnameable One and be very near to It,
>> to have some guaranty ... if any ...
> OK, I misunderstood what you meant by "unsound", I thougth you meant
> something like "unlogical". But now I see that you mean something like
> "irrational". And I sure am irrational.
You're not, remember you're a zombie hence there is no *you*.
>>> I do not want to be tortured, I behave as if I try to avoid that as
>>> strongly as I can. Because I behave in this way, I answer "no" to
>>> your question, because that answer will decrease the probability of you
>>> torturing me.
>> Do you realize that to defend your point you are always in the
>> obligation, when talking about any first person notion, like
>> consciousness, fear, desire, to add "I behave like ....". But if you
>> can do that successfully you will make me doubt that you are a zombie.
>> Or ... do you think a zombie could eventually find a correct theory of
>> consciousness, so that he can correctly fake consciousness, and delude
>> the humans?
> An intelligent zombie can correctly fake consciousness, and I am an
> intelligent zombie.
A zombie is not intelligent, a zombie simply isn't. There is no
consciousness in a zombie by definition, so a zombie is not and can't
>>>> 3) Do you have any "sort-of" feeling, insight, dreams, impression,
>>>> sensations, subjective or mental life, ... ?
>>> I behave as if I have "sort-of" feelings, I behave as if I have
>>> insights, I behave as if I have dreams, I behave as if I have
>>> impressions, I behave as if I have sensations, I behave as if I have a
>>> subjective or mental life, ...
>> As I said. But if you know that, I mean if you can behave like if you
>> were knowing that, it would mean that such words do have some meaning
>> for you.
>> How can you know that you are not conscious? Why do you behave like if
>> you are conscious, and then "confess" to us that you are not. Why
>> don't you behave like if you were not conscious. Should not a zombie
>> defend the idea that he is conscious, if he behaves like if he was
> If you ask me if I am conscious, I will reply "yes". But I am so
You're not, you are a zombie. There is no you.
> that I can look at myself from the outside,
You can't, you have no self.
> and then I
> understand why I behave like I do.
> I can see that all my behaviour is
You can't, there is no you and you can't see anything, you are a zombie.
> explained by chemical reactions in my brain, and there is no more than
> that. So when I talk about myself on the meta level, then I can say
> that I have no consciousness. But most people are not intelligent
> enough to realize that.
> Torgny Tholerus
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at