Sure, but if you understand why the belief has to be true ontologically, then it does strongly suggest that it could be true. If you can explain why a free spectator in a deterministic machine would feel presence or responsibility toward that machine, even though there is no possibility that they can change the machine in any way, then I would be interested in hearing about that. > > > I was watching a CGI cartoon this morning and was noticing that the > sterility of the medium must be fought every step of the way by the > animators to inject some warmth and character. The digital medium is not > neutral, it is anesthetically biased. Because computation is devoid both of > the gravity of realism and the vitality of animation, the CGI animator must > compensate with low level visual distractions at all times - plugging the > holes in the audience's experience with lots of clever details. > > A non-CGI movie on a medium such as DVD is digitally encoded so is > potentially generable by computer. Indeed, it is generable by a program > enumerating all possible movies. Potentially but not necessarily actually. Copying a photograph pixel by pixel is not the same as generating an image. This is at the heart of the issue - the recognition of the different levels of quality of consciousness: Y1. detection: input/output - amplitude/intensity, frequency, presence/participation. Y2. sensation: color/tone, attraction/repulsion, association potential Y3. perception: image, experienced gestalt. Y4: feeling: episodic awareness, fluid continuum of perceptions. Y5: awareness: worldly embeddedness, narrative continuity, parallel experiences of others. Y6. consciousness: awareness of self as other, abstract thought and language. Y7: intuition: awareness of synchronicity, symbolic depths, super-personal archetypes Y8: fusion: identification with the eternal, loss of body identity, Satori/enlightenment/Nirvana Information processing is on the opposite axis. Where Y0 is Sense, X0 is the opposite - Logic. Logic replaces sense with a structure that can be referred to instead of relying on a subject's sensations and feelings. Logic is about controlling functions and needs no feelings at all (ask Mr. Spock's Dad). X1. information: low level discernment only - digital universal. Binary code. Bits. X-1. switching: a device used to register and store a discrete, testable state of a physical object. X2. Meta-data. Grouping of bits into bytes, Kb, Mb, Gb... Copy and paste. Sequential analysis. X-2. Meta-switches. Grouping of devices by division of labor. Routing and nesting of functions. X3. Programs. Logical groupings of functions which are composed independently of hardware but executed as data. X-3. Machines. Devices which compute, route, switch, execute programs (silently, invisibly, without experience) X4. Meta-programs. Self-extending programs which use logic to edit themselves. Turing Machines. X-4. Universal Machines. Devices driven by Meta-programs to modify their own hardware (or meta-software in Comp). That's just a rough run-down of course, my point is only to show that the considerations of information are completely perpendicular to those of sense. We use logic, we use computation, and computation and logic use us - but - we are not computation or logic, we are genuine sensory-motor experience which is anchored permanently into the on-and-only, authentically and concretely real narrative of eternity. Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.