It seems to me Max Tegmark is assuming that consciousness is a state of
matter, and looking at what properties that matter must have. Hence he
doesn't have an explanatory theory, just an assumption. It is a materialist
assumtpion, I guess similar to Hugh Everett III's viewpoint when he
considers observers in his relative state formulattion, the question is
whether this matters - I'd say not in the case of Everett, who is only
trying to account for why certain experimental outcomes are observed, but
this does become important when one is trying to actually explain
consciousness, which Tegmark is attempting. "We examine the hypothesis that
consciousness can be understood as a state of matter". Hence the results of
making this assumption are crucial to justifying it - does he end up with
new and interesting insights into the subject? Can he distinguish a
conscious being from an unconscious but clever robot? I have only read a
couple of pages so far, so I will read on with interest...

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 post to this group, send email to
Visit this group at
For more options, visit

Reply via email to