Hi Jack,


            On reading the first page of your paper a thought occurred to
me. What actually happens in the case of progressive Alzheimer's disease is
a bit different from the idea that I get from the discussion. It could be
that there is a problem with the unstated premise that consciousness is a
quantity/quality that can be increased or decreased, like the volume of the
music that I'm listening to as I write this. I have a family member that
cares for the elderly and there is a consistent pattern of phenomena
associated with the degradation of the brain that does not resemble anything
like that which is considered as "consciousness".  This question equally
applies to D. Chalmers. Are you really considering "something" that I can
realistically map to my own 1st person experience or could it be merely some
abstract idea. 

            I remember the joke about spherical cows, could this be
happening here? Seriously! 








From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 11:39 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: problem of size '10


On 11 Feb 2010, at 17:14, Jack Mallah wrote:

--- On Thu, 2/11/10, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

A little thin brain would produce a zombie?

Even if size affects measure, a zombie is not a brain with low measure; it's
a brain with zero measure.  So the answer is obviously no - it would not be
a zombie.  Stop abusing the language.

We know that small terms in the wavefunction have low measure.  I would not
call these terms 'zombies'.  Many small terms together can equal or exceed
the measure of big terms.

MGA is more general (and older). The only way to escape the conclusion would
be to attribute consciousness to a movie of a computation

That's not true.  For partial replacement scenarios, where part of a brain
has counterfactuals and the rest doesn't, see my partial brain paper:




It is not a question of true or false, but of presenting a valid or non
valid deduction. I don't see anything in your comment or links which
prevents the conclusions of being reached from the assumptions. If you think
so, tell me at which step, and provide a justification.


You may read the archives, for new recent presentation or my papers, and
eventually point on something you don't understand.



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

Reply via email to