On 24 Sep, 09:14, Flammarion <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 24 Sep, 00:45, David Nyman <david.ny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 2009/9/23 Flammarion <peterdjo...@yahoo.com>:
>
> > >> >>You concluded that the realisation of a computation doesn't
> > >> >> cause consciousness.  But did you also mean to imply that nonetheless
> > >> >> the realisation of a computation IS consciousness?  If so, why didn't
> > >> >> you say so?  And how would that now influence your evaluation of CTM?
>
> > >> Would you respond to this please?
>
> > > I don't think CTM solves the HP. I don't think CTM contradicts
> > > physcialism.
>
> > If you don't think CTM solves the HP then presumably you don't hold
> > that conscious states supervene on the physical tokens of particular
> > computational types.
>
> They might do inexplocably. But the significant point
> is that nothing else solves the HP either,

Another point that has got rather lost here is that computationalists
tend to be a lot more concerned about cognition than experience, CTM
has no trouble explaining how people play chess.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to