On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 03:53:09PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > When I say that the movie is thinking, it is in the frame of both > comp *and* the physical supervenience thesis, and it is to get the > reductio ad absurdum.
OK - but how does supervenvience cause the reductio in this case? Or is it COMP that causes the reductio? Or must it be the conjunction. I don't understand. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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.
