John Mikes wrote: > > Don't let yourself drag into a narrower vision just to be able to agree, > please. I say openly: I dunno (not Nobel-stuff I admit). > I agree wholheartedly! That's why I don't like the reasoning. It is very narrow, and pretends to be a proof (or at least a valid reasoning) for something that can't be concluded through reason. It is very immodest to just disregard all criticism of the argument (and to defend that with "you don't know what you're talking about"), and then claim to be modest by virtue of not taken the assumption for granted. Taken the validity of reasoning for granted is not much more modest than taking assumptions for granted, since really the reasoning itself depends on many unstated assumption. In this case, for example, only materialism or computational immaterialism can be true, it is meaningful to say YES to something that is subjectively not happening, etc... I don't *know* the reasoning is false, but I can see plainly that is not quite as objectively valid as Bruno wants to present it as.
Being able to say "I DUNNO!" is, in my opinion, one of the most important steps in really being able to experience reality and ourselves in an unbiased and clear manner. As long as we cling to knowledge, we are looking at our ideas of reality and ourselves, not at reality as it actually is. benjayk -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/The-consciousness-singularity-tp32803353p32891833.html Sent from the Everything List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. 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.