On 7/14/2012 9:48 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
No, the reverse is the case. The "belongs to an infinity of computations making you
singling out some stable patterns" requires the prior existence of the "you" to select
it. The observer (you here) effectively is the measure via a self-selection rule. I
cannot discount my own existence given the immediate fact that I am experiencing myself
as existing. Descartes' Cognito ergo Sum is a pointed statement of this unassailable
fact. We cannot put the observer on a level that is emerging from the computations if
the observer is the one that is selecting the class of computations that are generating
How does this comport with Everett's QM which has it that there is no unique, persistent
"you" to do the selecting. It seems a simple matter of logic that any theory which sets
out to explain consciousness cannot assume an observer, on pain of circularity.
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