On 14 Mar 2012, at 19:35, meekerdb wrote:
On 3/14/2012 10:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I never localize consciousness. Only persons. And yes, it is pretty
obvious that person can locate themselves in a local relative way,
like saying that yesterday I was in Tokyo, today in I am in
Helsinki and tomorrow I will be in Moscow, if I decide to buy the
tickets for the planes.
I don't think that's obvious. You can locate where your perceptions
come from, but if one eye received input from Moscow and the other
from Washington while your auditory nerves were wired to microphones
in Helsinki and your brain was in Brussels; where would you be?
In that very peculiar situation I would still be on planet earth, and
partially in Moscow, partially in Washington, partially in Helsinki,
and partially in Brussels.
You are literally right. Self-localization can be made difficult, but
here they are used as tools for the thought experiment.
So such remark is not relevant for invalidating the question of
probability.
I could use, as I do sometimes, the two rooms with 0 and 1 painted on
the wall for the duplication setting, and the question would be "will
I see 1 or 0".
In the course of the reasoning we get that consciousness "is" in
platonia/arithmetical-truth/whatever", and that persons can localize
themselves in bodies and place in a relative way if the right
computations allows such relativization. Self-localization is just
handy for those thought experience, assuming the bodies are
reconstituted entire and functional.
Dennett illustrates very well your point in "where am I" in the book
Minds' I (edited with Hofstadter).
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
