So you can see that comp, as defined in sane04, is a weaker version of
CTM. (And thus all consequences of comp are inherit by CTM).
Certainly it is clear that your /yes doctor/ hypothesis subsumes CTM.
But since it is a broader proposition, I fail to see why "all
consequences of comp are inherit by CTM". One could adopt CTM and yet
still debate comp - though I have no interest in doing so. Above all,
why should CTM inherit the second of your three comp sub-hypotheses:
Church Thesis and Arithmetical Realism?
Expression like "mind is a digital computer" are category error, and
is also ambiguous.
I am happy to settle with something much more abstract, such as "mind is
an algorithm of some kind" if that helps.
It relates also on the identity thesis in the philosophy of mind,
which is actually incompatible with comp (and thus with CTM).
I wonder what you consider to be the "identity thesis in the philosophy
I think that it is also incompatible with QM, but that is out of topic.
No. Chalmers state categorically this concept is compatible with physics.
With comp you can associate a mind to the execution of a computer, but
you cannot attach a computer to a mind.
I am not sure of the point you are making here. What do you mean by
You might attach an infinity of computer executions to a mind. The
relation is not one-one.
Assuming 'attach' means instantiated, yes, the mind is multiply
instantiated. No problem there. This is the basis of my concept
multisolipsism - described shortly.
Now I'm really not sure what you mean by 'attach'. Associate with?
Consider instantiated in? Consider supervenient on? Causally dependent on?
That is among other things a consequence of UDA.
To say that thought literally is a kind of computation is ambiguous.
That might be enough in some context, but the more precise comp is
needed to understand the comp (and thus CTM) necessary reduction of
body to mind, or of physics to arithmetic (or computer science).
And rather than saying that "thought literally is a kind of
computation", comp says that ...?
Indicating the "necessary reduction of body to mind, or of physics to
arithmetic (or computer science)" because ...?
I am separating my responses to various parts of your email so I can
stay focused on one issue at a time as we exchange our views.
My compartmentalised response is continued in email subject: CTM and ALG
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at