On 1/13/2013 2:02 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/13/2013 12:44 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
OK. My point is that if we assume computationalism it is necessarily
so, and constructively so, so making that hypothesis testable.
We have the logical entaiment:
Arithmetic -> computations -> consciousness -> sharable dreams ->
physical reality/matter -> human biology -> human consciousness.
It is a generalization of "natural selection" operating from
arithmetical truth, and in which the physical reality is itself the
result of a self-selection events (the global first person
indeterminacy).
This generalizes both Darwin and Everett, somehow.
But you stop one step too soon.
Arithmetic -> computations -> consciousness -> sharable dreams ->
physical reality/matter -> human biology -> human consciousness ->
arithmetic.
That there is something fundamental is unscientific dogma.
Brent
Hi,
I agree with Brent but would refine the point to say that 'that
there is something fundamental that has particular properties is
unscientific dogma'.
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
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.
