On Sunday, February 16, 2014 12:35:59 AM UTC-5, Kim Jones wrote: > > > On 16 Feb 2014, at 2:06 pm, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]<javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Friday, February 14, 2014 10:23:35 PM UTC-5, Kim Jones wrote: >> >> >> >> On 15 Feb 2014, at 1:09 pm, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 2/14/2014 4:24 PM, Kim Jones wrote: >> >> >> On 14 Feb 2014, at 3:42 pm, Russell Standish <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> What about the CMBR? When it was created there were (presumably) no >> >> observers in existence in the universe. Are you saying it wouldn't exist >> if >> we hadn't evolved to detect it (e.g. if humans hadn't evolved, or if we >> had >> never invented radio telescopes) ? >> >> >> Yes - exactly. >> >> >> >> >> A direct consequence of The Reversal. First comes Mind. Physics and >> matter and the 3D holographic farmyard are a long way down the road. >> I hope no one is assuming that it requires something as weird as a >> “human” to implement consciousness. >> Something as basic as a Boltzmann brain would be in principle, instantly >> possible in any universe, surely. >> >> >> >> Of course Boltzmann brains are notoriously transient, so we're to think >> of the universe (or at least pieces of past light cones) blinking in and >> out of existence. Or does that take a Boltzmann brain plus optic nerves >> and eyes and a Boltzmann telescope? >> >> Brent >> >> >> A mind without a "hosting apparatus" is the entity I am struggling to >> describe. I have no trouble with the notion that consciousness can simply >> exist with no extra qualifiers whatsoever. We are talking about that which >> simply exists - when it exists, where it exists, its characteristics etc. >> are another story. I don't know whether such questions are even relevant. >> >> Kim >> > > Existence, when, where, and characteristics would all be conditions within > the primordial capacity for experience. > > Craig > > > OK - so Hameroff and Penrose's conjecture that consciousness was > a property of the primordial universe has legs then? These two are > physicalists though; if I read Russell correctly he is saying this. >
I would go further and say that the possibility of the primordial universe, as well as the possibility of properties is part of primordial sense. Craig > > Kim > > > >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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.
