On Feb 21, 4:16 pm, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012  Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>
> > it is important to conceive that comp might be false.
>
> Why? If it's false I don't see how there could be a way to prove it false,

Huh? Hardly anything is exactly computer-emulable. Flight
simulators don't fly. The Computational Theory of X
has been disproved (or never even entertained) for many values of X

> and as we can not function unless we assume it's true

WHAAAAT??? How did we function before the 20th century???



> > > Comp is an hypothesis concerning consciousness. Why should we must to
> > assume it.
>
> Because it's important but nobody will ever be able to prove or disprove it
> and most of all because nobody can function if they thought they were the
> only conscious being in the universe.

What the hell has solipsism got to do with CTM?



> > > I argue that comp reduces the mind-body problem into a
> > appearance-of-body problem in arithmetic. In a nutshell, comp seems to be
> > incompatible with an already weak form of materialism (the belief in an
> > ontological primitive matter).
>
> Maybe that's because consciousness is a adjective not a noun

It isn;t

-- 
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.

Reply via email to