From: Russell Standish
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: Mathematical closure of consciousness and computation
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 06:52:52PM -0400, Rex Allen wrote:
So how does this prove what I said false? All those static "futures"
are mine. They're all determined. I'm still on rails...it's just
that the rails split in a rather unintuitive way.
When you use the imagery of "rails", there is no splitting involved -
just a single track going forward. Otherwise there's no point in
But it's your analogy, I suppose you're entitled to Humpty Dumpty's defense
("the words mean exactly what I choose them to mean").
Even if we say that what constitutes "me" is a single unbranched
path...this still doesn't make what I said false. I'm one of those
paths, I just don't know which. But ignorance of the future is not
indeterminism. Ignorance of the future is ignorance of the (fully
It is not ignorance, but true indeterminism. Perhaps you haven't
understood the full import yet.
I would like to be sure that I understand your point here. Would you say
that "true determinism", as opposed to "true indeterminism", requires
one-to-one mappings between any two adjoining links in the causal chain of
events, each of which is said to be uniquely determined by its prior?
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