I'm not sure who, the nested quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes of quotes
have defeated me, but somebody wrote:
> Bruno has always said that COMP is a matter of theology (or religion),
> that is, the provably unprovable,
Then insistence that "COMP" is untrue is just as religious as saying "COMP"
is true. Incidentally this list is the only place I've seen the term "COMP"
used, I'd just call it logic or even common sense.
> and I agree with this. However, let's try and see why that is and why
> someone would take COMP as an assumption:
That's easy, everybody assumes it's true (except when they're arguing
philosophy on the internet) because nobody can function if they thought
every tree and rock and cadaver or even living person was conscious all the
time, and because nobody can function if they thought they were the only
conscious being in the universe. Therefore everybody assumes (except when
they're arguing philosophy on the internet) that intelligent behavior
implies intelligence and intelligence implies consciousness. It's a axiom
everybody and I do mean everybody uses all the time, except when they're
arguing philosophy on the internet.
John K Clark
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