Hi Stephen P. King Now I see your problem with Chalmers. It seems to be too sweeping a remark, but Leibniz would agree. because God, who is the supreme monad, causes all to happen. Mind is the ruling power. As I say below,
"If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." Roger Clough, [email protected] 9/16/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-15, 13:04:41 Subject: Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment On 9/15/2012 8:52 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Stephen P. King > > I seem to have-- whoops-- totally misread him. Logical dyslexia ? Hi Roger, Good catch! Yeah, my dyslexia distorts things in a weird "telephone game" way... > > His first sentence is correct: > > "Conscious experience is an expression of nonphysical mind" OK, but I agree with that remark. It is the idea that "all that exists is the possible expressions of nonphysical mind" that I find to be deeply flawed. > > I don't follow the rest of your comments. Berkeley's solipsism has > never been disproven, as far as I know. The inability for Berkeley and those to support his thesis to answer to Mr. Johnson's retort of bounding his foot off of a rock was the evidence of the flaw. A thesis that makes a deed ontological statement, such as Immaterials does with its thesis that: "all that exists is the possible expressions of nonphysical mind", need to be able to explain the causal relationships of that which it claims is "merely epiphenomena", as such can have (by definition) no causal efficacy whatsoever. The fact that I experience a world that is not directly maleable to my whim is a pretty good indication that it is not just the case "all that exists is the possible expressions of nonphysical mind" since I have what very much appears to be a " nonphysical mind". > > > Roger Clough, [email protected] > 9/15/2012 > Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him > so that everything could function." > ----- Receiving the following content ----- > From: Stephen P. King > Receiver: everything-list > Time: 2012-09-14, 12:09:25 > Subject: Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment > > > On 9/14/2012 7:05 AM, Roger Clough wrote: >> Hi Craig Weinberg >> >> His very first sentence is wrong. Conscious experience is an expression of >> nonphysical mind, >> although it may deal with physical topics. >> >> "It is widely accepted that conscious experience has a physical basis. > Dear Roger, > > No, you misunderstand his argument. If "Conscious experience is an > expression of nonphysical mind" in a strict "nothing but" sense then > consciousness would be completely solipsistic and incapable of even > comprehending that it is not all that exists. It is because > consciousness is contained to be Boolean representable (and thus > finite!) that it can "bet" on its incompleteness and thus go beyond > itself, escaping its solipsism. > >> >> Roger Clough, [email protected] >> 9/14/2012 >> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him >> so that everything could function." >> >> >> ----- Receiving the following content ----- >> From: Craig Weinberg >> Receiver: everything-list >> Time: 2012-09-13, 15:03:13 >> Subject: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment >> >> >> If anyone is not familiar with David Chalmers "Absent Qualia, Fading Qualia, >> Dancing Qualia" You should have a look at it first. >> >> This thought experiment is intended to generalize principles common to both >> computationalism and functionalism so that the often confusing objections >> surrounding their assumptions can be revealed. >> >> Say that we have the technology to scan the city of New York by means of >> releasing 100,000 specially fitted cats into the streets, which will return >> to the laboratory in a week's time with a fantastically large amount of data >> about what the cats see and feel, smell and taste, hear, their positions and >> movements relative to each other, etc. >> >> We now set about computing algorithms to simulate the functions of Brooklyn >> such that we can tear down Brooklyn completely and replace it with a >> simulation which causes cats released into the simulated environment to >> behave in the same way as they would have according to the history of their >> initial release. >> >> Indeed, cats in Manhattan travel to and from Brooklyn as usual. Perhaps to >> get this right, we had to take all of Brooklyn and grind it up in a giant >> blender until it becomes a paste of liquified corpses, garbage, concrete, >> wood, and glass, and then use this substrate to mold into objects that can >> be moved around remotely to suit the expectations of the cats. >> >> Armed with the confidence of the feline thumbs-up, we go ahead and replace >> Manhattan and the other boroughs in the same way, effectively turning a city >> of millions into a cat-friendly cemetery. While the experiment is not a PR >> success (Luddites and Fundamentalists complain loudly about a genocide), our >> cats assure us that all is well and the experiment is a great success. >> >> Craig >> >> >> -- Onward! Stephen http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html -- 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. -- 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.
