On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:35 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> It may have started a nanosecond
>> ago, even though I remember starting to count up from zero and am now
>> at the number ten. That is, I am at the number ten but it may only be
>> the last part, the "n" of the ten that I have actually thought; it's
>> only a ten when I look back and have the false memory of counting.
>>  
> 
> Isn't that what Bruno calls "last Tuesdayims"?  If OMs are continuous (or
> overlap) then that would provide a sequence and at least an implicit time.

Or Last Thursdayism. Last Tuesdayism is a heresy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis

The important point for this argument is that we would have no way of knowing 
if Last Tuesdayism is true, and this shows that the OM's can be sequenced 
implicitly from their content. If this were not so, and the subjective 
sequencing and normal perception of time could only happen if the OM's were 
generated objectively in sequence, then Last Tuesdayism could be falsified from 
the fact that we do not remember a discontinuity.

>> When I have a small thought it doesn't necessarily include memories of
>> previous thoughts, and certainly not of my whole past life. But if
>> that presented a problem for sequencing of disjointedly generated OM's
>> it would present the same problem for a stream of consciousness
>> generated by a normally functioning brain. If I have a sufficiently
>> vague moment I may not, in fact, be aware of where, when or even who I
>> am. When I snap out of it, I recall the vagueness, and I recall that
>> it happened after I had a cup of coffee and before I stood up to go
>> for a walk. But the same sequencing would have happened if the coffee,
>> the vagueness and the walk had all been generated in a disjointed
>> manner, and there is nothing in the experience which can indicate to
>> me that this is not in fact what happened.
>>  
> 
> But there is much in other experiences that indicate it did not happen that
> way.  Are you saying you have no theory of the world and OMs, but only
> immediate experience which could be an illusion.

How the experiences are generated is a separate question. Probably Monday was 
generated before Tuesday, since some information from Monday's experiences is 
contained in Tuesday's experiences. However, it is not true as a matter of 
logical necessity that Monday was generated before Tuesday. The subjective 
sequencing would occur no matter how Monday and Tuesday were generated.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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