On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:10:03 PM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: > > On 24 February 2014 17:38, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > > No, that's the point of the analogy, so you can see for yourself why the >> question is not reasonable. The question posed over and over to me here has >> been some variation of this same "But if the world didn't work the way that >> it does, wouldn't you have to agree that you were wrong and the world was >> right?" > > > You've lost me. Surely such questions are more like "If the world turned > out not to work the way in the way you predict, wouldn't you have to agree > that you were wrong and the world was right?" >
It's not the way that I predict though, it is the way that the world already it. It is CTM which is predicting a future technology that transcends consciousness and can duplicate it. > IOW I thought I was asking a question capable of a definite answer in > principle. I thought you had a definite view about whether any significant > part of the brain could be functionally substituted without subjective > consequences for the patient. > Yes, I have a definite view - some parts of the brain can be functionally substituted without subjective consequences for the personal experience of the patient, but that has nothing to do with the transpersonal and subpersonal experiences of the patient, which would be impacted in some way. The overall effect may or may not be 'significant' to us personally, but it makes absolutely no difference and is a Red Herring to the question of whether consciousness can be generated mechanically. > In fact I assumed that your view was that this wouldn't be possible. Is > that incorrect? On that assumption, I asked you to consider, > hypothetically, my telling you that I had survived such a substitution > without any loss or difference. If such an eventuality were to occur, > wouldn't you at least consider that this anomaly put your theory in doubt? > Why would it put my theory in doubt? If you can substitute the brake pedal on a Rolls Royce with a piece of plywood and duct tape, does that mean that a Rolls Royce can be replaced entirely by plywood and duct tape? Does it mean that there is some magical point where the Rolls stops being a Rolls if you keep replacing parts? If you start with the wood and tape, you can never get a Rolls, but if you start with a Rolls, you can do quite a bit of modification without it being devalued significantly. Craig > > David > -- 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.
