On 3/30/2012 4:23 PM, David Nyman wrote:
On 30 March 2012 19:54, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net>  wrote:

>>  The problem with all this (as Kent makes explicit) is that there is
>>  nothing in the mathematics of the "game physics" that corresponds to
>>  this kind of momentary selection of subjective localisation.
>>  Unfortunately, his own proposal doesn't really solve the underlying
>>  problem, because although it can account, given the experimental
>>  situation, for my seeing spin-up and not spin-down (because the other
>>  doesn't objectively exist any longer) it cannot account for why the
>>  experience is of David making this observation rather than Brent
>  It does if you think experience is an epiphenomena of physics.  Brent and
>  David are different physical systems and only one is looking at the system.
Sure, but even if one believes that to be the case, it is still taken
entirely for granted that there is some natural principle for the
selection of THIS physical system from the class of all such systems.

?? I guess I don't understand the question. If my experience is a process in my brain then what more selection is required?

To appeal, a posteriori, to the fact that one's observational
perspective is apparently associated with this particular system and
not any other is merely to argue in a circle; since that is what we
are trying to explain we cannot adduce it as the explanation.

That seems like conjuring a mystery out of nothing. Is your question why is my observational perspective associated with my brain?


As I said before, the requirement for some principle of selection, in
this sense, is rarely made explicit, but nonetheless implicitly relied
on.  More often than not our particular localisation in space and time
has been consigned to the realm of "psychology" or "illusion", as in
Einstein's reputed remark, as though it were somehow possible to
disarm this inconvenient observational fact with scare quotes.  So
what intrigued me about Hoyle's idea (and according to Gribbin it was
rather more than a fictional conceit for him) was precisely that his
making it explicit exposed an "elephant in the room" that few others
were prepared to acknowledge.


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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to