2011/12/8 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>
> On 12/8/2011 6:33 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>> The UD argument is not a proof of computationalism being true, is an
>> argument that shows computationalism (I can be run on a digital computer)
>> is not compatible with materialism. It shows that to be able to predict
>> your next moment (if computationlism is true) then the primitive material
>> world is of no use (if there is one).
> I don't think so. It is patently untrue that the material world model is
> of no use in predicting your next experience. In fact it is essentially
> the only useful model for prediction.
That's not what I said. I said that the primitive world if any is of no use
if we are computation, because our next moment is part of the infinity of
computations that goes through our current state and only that. So in that
case you use the "appearance" world not a *primitive* world.
> "I wonder if practitioners of alternative medicine would fly in airliners
> designed by alternative aerodynamics?"
> --- TG, Holistic Lawyer
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe@
> **googlegroups.com <everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
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