On 16 May 2013, at 19:07, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:

On 16.05.2013 18:22 meekerdb said the following:
On 5/16/2013 12:41 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:

...


I might be wrong and it might be interesting to look the archives
through more carefully. Well, this was my impression that "mental
is physical" was expressed quite often here.

What is expressed often here is that the mental, i.e. thoughts,
supervene on physical processes.   This is implicit in saying "yes"
to the doctor since that is betting that the doctor can provide
physical processes on which your consciousness will supervene.


What is the meaning of "mental is physical", I do not know. This
would be exactly the goal to understand such a statement better.

Why not just understand it is not true.

Let me put is this way. Let us assume that

> mental, i.e. thoughts,
> supervene on physical processes.

Does mental has its own casual power as in strong emergence?

Assuming comp, and assuming there is no flaw in the UDA, we know that the physical laws supervene on machine's psychology, which supervenes on elementary arithmetic. Would you say that the physical has no "causal power" of its own? I would say it has very plausibly such power, and likewise, the fact that human consciousness supervenes on physical computers, does not cast any shadow of doubts on the causal power of human consciousness. To believe the contrary means that there is a confusion of level made somewhere. A low universal machine's work can support an high level universal machine capable of changing itself completely, and independently of the nature of the low level computation. So the mental has its own "causal power" and is working fine in its own realm. Is it strong emergence? I am not sure, as I have read inconsistent definition of this notion, quite similar to the inconsistent definition often given for free-will.




The comparison

1) mental vs. physical

with

2) natural. vs. artificial

could probably help.

Comparison on what measure?

On casual power of mental.

Without mental power, there would be no "Mona Lisa", nor atomic bombs. Those things happen when many layers of universality are at play and reflect themselves and others. Arithmetic and other non physical things have already "causal power". Indeed, already exploited by the physical in some way. Now the term "cause" is itself complex to define, and is a higher notion itself, and is sometimes ambiguous, so I might miss your point.

Bruno






Evgenii

--
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 everything-list@googlegroups.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.



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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 everything-list@googlegroups.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.


Reply via email to