On 22 January 2014 18:26, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 02:42:43PM +1300, LizR wrote: > > > > Phew, I got there in the end :) > > > > I can only assume that having an (apparent) body etc is more probable > than > > being a disembodied p-ghost, but explaining this in comp (or any "Theory > of > > Nothing") sounds like it may be a measure problem over an infinite set. > > Naively, I would have thought the opposite, actually - hence I would be > looking > for some logical principle preventing it occurring. I speculated in my > book that consciousness may not be sustainable without a body to act > as a feedback for self-awareness, as being that reason. > > That's more or less what I was trying to say. I would "naively expect" to be a p-ghost, or at least not particularly attached to a body, unless there's a damn good reason for it to be there. (Assuming we don't accept the "classical materialism" reason for it to be there, of course.) -- 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.
