On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:24, Craig Weinberg wrote:

On Friday, October 26, 2012 1:01:34 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We are atoms, molecules, cells, tissues, and organisms. Whatever we do is > what the laws of physics *actually are*. Your assumptions about the laws of > physics are 20th century legacy ideas based on exterior manipulations of
> exterior instruments to measure other exterior phenomena.

Whatever we do is determined by a small set of rules,

No. What we as humans do is determined by human experiences and human character, which is not completely ruled externally. We participate directly. It could only be a small set of rules if those rules include 'do whatever you like, whenever you have the chance'.

the rules being
as you say what matter actually does and not imposed by people or
divine whim.

Matter is a reduced shadow of experiences. Matter is ruled by people and people are ruled by matter. Of the two, people are the more directly and completely real phenomena.

This is correct, but not obvious at all (for aristotelicians), and yet a logical consequence of comp, with "people" replaced by Löbian universal machine.

This has been be put in a constructive form, with computer science. It makes comp (+ reasonable definition of knowledge, observation, in the UD context) testable, and already tested on non trivial relations between what is observable (quantum logic).

The science and the math already exist.

All machines looking inward deep enough will develop a non comp intuition, and some can go beyond.


I really don't understand where you disagree with me,
since you keep making statements then pulling back if challenged.

I don't see where I am pulling back. I disagree with you in that to you any description of the universe which is not matter in space primarily is inconceivable. I am saying that what matter is and does is not important to understanding consciousness itself. It is important to understanding personal access to human consciousness, i.e. brain health, etc, but otherwise it is consciousness, on many levels and ranges of quality, which gives rise to the appearance of matter and not the other way around.

you think the molecules in your brain follow the laws of physics, such
as they may be?

The laws of physics have no preference one way or another whether this part of my brain or that part of my brain is active. I am choosing that directly by what I think about. If I think about playing tennis, then the appropriate cells in my brain will depolarize and molecules will change positions. They are following my laws. Physics is my servant in this case. Of course, if someone gives me a strong drink, then physics is influencing me instead and I am more of a follower of that particular chemical event than a leader.

If so, then the behaviour of each molecule is
determined or follows probabilistic laws, and hence the behaviour of
the collection of molecules also follows deterministic or
probabilistic laws.

I am determining the probabilities myself, directly. They are me. How could it be otherwise?

If consciousness, sense, will, or whatever else is
at play in addition to this then we would notice a deviation from
these laws.

Not in addition to, sense and will are the whole thing. All activity in the universe is sense and will and nothing else. Matter is only the sense and will of something else besides yourself.

That is what it would MEAN for consciousness, sense, will
or whatever else to have a separate causal efficacy;

No. I don't know how many different ways to say this: Sense is the only causal efficacy there ever was, is, or will be. Sense is primordial and universal. Electromagnetism, gravity, strong and weak forces are only examples of our impersonal view of the sense of whatever it is we are studying secondhand.

absent this, the
physical laws, whatever they are, determine absolutely everything that
happens, everywhere, for all time. Which part of this do you not agree

None of it. I am saying there are no physical laws at all. There is no law book. That is all figurative. What we have thought of as physics is as crude and simplistic as any ancient mythology. What we see as physical laws are the outermost, longest lasting conventions of sense. Nothing more. I think that the way sense works is that it can't contradict itself, so that these oldest ways of relating, once they are established, are no longer easy to change, but higher levels of sense arise out of the loopholes and can influence lower levels of sense directly. Hence, molecules build living cells defy entropy, human beings build airplanes to defy gravity.

> You can't see
> consciousness that way. From far enough a way, our cities look like nothing > more than glowing colonies of mold. It's not programming that makes us one > way or another, it is perception which makes things seem one way or another.
> The only thing that makes computers different is that they don't exist > without our putting them together. They don't know how to exist. This makes > them no different than letters that we write on a page or cartoons we watch
> on a screen.

If the computer came about through an amazing accident would that make
any difference to its consciousness or intelligence?

Yes. If a computer assembled itself by accident, I would give it the benefit of the doubt just like any other organism. But would it heal itself too? Would it reproduce? Would it lie and cheat and steal to get what it needs for it's computer family? If not, then the accidental computer would not last very long in the wild.

If a biological
human were put together from raw materials by advanced aliens would
that make any difference to his consciousness or intelligence?

It would if we were automaton servants of their agendas.


Stathis Papaioannou

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/-/OCJplR--MuEJ .
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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to