On 19 Aug 2009, at 22:26, Flammarion wrote:

>> I understand both your discomfort with arithmetical realism and your
>> defence of PM, but this discussion hinges on "CTM +PM = true".
>> Couldn't we try to focus on the validity or otherwise of this claim?
> OK. It's invalid because you can't have computaiton with zero phyiscal
> activity.

This could be a critic to Maudlin's Olympia argument, it does not  
apply to MGA. Precisely, it does not apply to MGA1+MGA2 (see the MGA  
thread). MGA3 makes a link between Olympia and MGA, but is not needed.

MGA1+MGA2 shows that if we accept the physical supervenience thesis,  
then we have to accept that consciousness supervenes "in real time" on  
the movie of a computation, which, I think, is already ridiculous. In  
MGA3 the stroboscope illustrates this, without reducing any physical  
activity at all.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to