Hi Bruno [JC] Because step 3 sucks.
[Bruno] Why? You have not yet make a convincing point on this. His point is convincing me. regards. > Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 23:18:07 +0200 > Subject: Re: What gives philosophers a bad name? > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 9:37 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 10/2/2013 7:03 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:34, meekerdb wrote: > >>> > >>> On 10/1/2013 7:13 AM, David Nyman wrote: > >>> > >>> However, on reflection, this is not what one should deduce from the > >>> logic as set out. The logical structure of each subjective moment is > >>> defined as encoding its relative past and anticipated future states > >>> (an assumption that seems consistent with our understanding of brain > >>> function, for example). > >>> > >>> > >>> But then it seems one needs the physical, or at least the subconscious. > >>> If > >>> one conceives a "subjective moment" as just what one is conscious of in > >>> "a > >>> moment" it doesn't encode very much of the past. And in the digital > >>> simulation paradigm the computational state doesn't encode any of it. So > >>> I > >>> think each conscious "moment" must have considerable extent in (physical) > >>> time so as to overlap and provide continuity. > >>> > >>> > >>> But then comp is false, OK? As with comp the present first person moment > >>> can > >>> be encoded, and indeed sent on Mars, etc. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Of course physical time need not correspond in any simple way to > >>> computational steps. > >>> > >>> > >>> OK. With this remark, comp remains consistent, indeed. That last remark > >>> is > >>> quite interesting, and a key to grasp comp and its relation to physics. I > >>> think. > >> > >> Could time arise from recursivity? A very caricatural example: > >> > >> f(x) = x :: f(x + 1) > >> > >> So f(0) would go through the steps: > >> (0) > >> (0 1) > >> (0 1 2) > >> ... > >> > >> If (in a caricatural way) we associated each step with a moment, each > >> step would contain a memory of the past, although the function I wrote > >> is just some static mathematical object I dug up from Platonia. > >> Furthermore, these moments would appear to be relates in a causality > >> sequence: (0) -> (0 1) -> (0 1 2) and so on. What do you think? > > > > > > They form a sequence of states which overlap and so have an inherent order. > > But that can't be the right model for conscious states because they don't > > contain all past conscious states; in general their content is very sparse > > relative memory. > > Sure but it would be trivial to define some recursive function that > generates a sequence of states with sparse or even distorted memories > of previous states. The recursive function could be as complex as you > like. > > Telmo. > > > Brent > > > > > > -- > > 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 [email protected]. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > 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 [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
