On 1/17/2014 2:04 PM, LizR wrote:
On 17 January 2014 18:03, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Briefly, computationalism is the idea that you could replace the brain
with a Turing machine and you would preserve the mind. This would not
be possible if there is non-computable physics in the brain,
Just to clarify, as I understand Bruno's theory, there is non-computable
physics in
the brain. In fact physics is non-computable in general, BUT the mind is
computable, i.e. the level of substitution that preserves the person is
above the
fundamental physics level. I actually think this last is dubious.
I also find it unlikely that the subst level is above the quantum level. Or at least I
think that if it's at the quantum level then we can guarantee that the duplication
arguments would work (assuming we could duplicate objects at that level, which we can't
due to a fundamental principle...!)
Actually Brent, your comment above reads like a refutation of comp, which I suspect
isn't the intention.
Or is it? I read it as
1 Comp says fundamental physics is non-computable.
2 Comp says the mind is the result of a computation.
3 Hence if the subst level is at the level of fundamental physics, 2 can't be
correct
4 I think it IS at the quantum level, so 2 is wrong, so comp is wrong - QED :)
I don't think 2 is right. I think comp says that a mind is the result of an infinite set
of computations, which are not computable. But Bruno can correct me if I'm wrong. And
similarly a physical object, like a neuron or an artificial neuron, is also not
computable. But then it may become a question of what does it mean to 'preserve a person'
when a person is just an abstraction, a self-modeling piece of the world. How accurately
does the substitution have to be to 'preserve'? If I had a silicon based neuron replacing
one of my biologically based ones, it might serve fine in transmitting neural pulses. But
it might not respond to some hormones. It wouldn't grow. I might respond very
differently to a stray cosmic ray particle. But I might still seem to be "me".
However, surely comp says the mind is the result of computations in Platonia, rather
than in the brain? In fact it says that the brain doesn't exist (along with everything
else, apart from Platonia).
But apparently the brain has a lot to do with those computations in Platonia, c.f.
anesthetic. Notice that I'm not a disciple of Platonia.
Brent
I feel as though my own brain is about to boggle, or would if it existed. Maybe I should
write everything "under erasure" to be on the safe side!
--
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.
