Hi Craig Weinberg  

I suggest that we only use the word "exists" to refer to something being in 
spacetime. 
Thus, the brain exists. 

Otherwise, when something has its being  outside of spacetime, 
we say that it "lives".  Thus mind lives, Platonia lives, numbers live,  
consciousness lives, life lives.  God lives.

Computers exist.
Computer programs live.

Intelligence lives. 
Consciousness lives.

I both exist and live.

Numbers live.


Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 
9/21/2012  
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen 


----- Receiving the following content -----  
From: Craig Weinberg  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2012-09-20, 22:04:04 
Subject: Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment 




On Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:49:58 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:  
On 9/20/2012 12:55 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 



On Thursday, September 20, 2012 7:19:30 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:  
Hi Craig Weinberg  

Consciousness requires an autonomous self. 

Human consciousness requires an autonomous human self, but it is not 
necessarily true that consciousness requires a 'self'. It makes more sense to 
say that an autonomous self and consciousness both require awareness. 


    What if awareness is what happens when autonomous self and consciousness 
mirror each other? 


There can't be an autonomous self without awareness as an ontological given to 
begin with, at least as an inevitable potential. What would a self be or do 
without awareness? You can have awareness without a self being presented within 
that awareness though. I've had dreams where there is no "I" there are just 
scenes that are taking place.  





  

So does life itself. And intelligence. 

We don't really know that. We can only speak for our own life and our own 
intelligence. I wouldn't presume a self, especially on low levels of awareness 
like molecular groupings. 
  


So, I hagte to say this, but perhaps consciousness and life may be a  
problem with mereology, don't know. 

Why is it a problem. Mereology is the public presentation of life, and the 
private presentation is the opposite: non-mereology. 


    Huh? non-mereology. What is that?  


I call it a-mereology also. That's the subjective conjugate to topology. In 
public realism there is the Stone Duality ( topologies - logical algebras) 
while the private phenomenology duality is orthogonal to the Stone (a-mereology 
- transrational gestalt-algebra). 

I posted about it a bit yesterday: 


Our feeling of hurting is a (whole) experience of human reality, so that it is 
not composed of sub-personal experiences in a part-whole mereological relation 
but rather the relation is just the opposite. It is non-mereological or 
a-mereological. It is the primordial semi-unity/hyper-unity from which 
part-whole distinctions are extracted and projected outward as classical 
realism of an exterior world. I know that sounds dense and crazy, but I don? 
know of a clearer way to describe it. Subjective experience is augmented along 
an axis of quality rather than quantity. Experiences of hurting capitulate sub 
personal experiences of emotional loss and disappointment, anger, and fear, 
with tactile sensations of throbbing, stabbing, burning, and cognitive feedback 
loops of worry, impatience, exaggerating and replaying the injury or illness, 
memories of associated experiences, etc. But we can just say ?urting? and we 
all know generally what that means. No more particular description adds much to 
it. That is completely unlike exterior realism, where all we can see of a 
machine hurting would be that more processing power would seem to be devoted to 
some particular set of computations. They don? run ?ll together and at once?, 
unless there is a living being who is there to interpret it that way - as we do 
when we look at a screen full of individual pixels and see images through the 
pixels rather than the changing pixels themselves.  

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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/R2dVP-ATA_oJ. 
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.

-- 
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