On 6/9/2014 5:55 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 June 2014 10:13, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 6/9/2014 2:46 PM, LizR wrote:I guess I could venture that it's the ontology of any TOE in which interactions are all 3p. OK, thanks. So I would guess that it's equivalent to eliminativism, as I think it's called - the idea that consciousness is an illusion ("albeit a persistent one"). It does seem that way to me.I don't think it implies eliminativism. There's still temperature even though we have statistical mechanics. I think there's far too much importance given to "what's fundamental" and it leads to calling everything else and illusion. I doubt that Bruno thinks arithmetic is an illusion just because what's fundamental is 0, S, +, and *. A correction to this kind of obsession with essence is why I like my virtuous circle of explanation.So how can all interactions be 3p? Maybe I misunderstood. It seems to me that consciousness implies there's 1p stuff going on?
I might be possible to know exactly what conscious thoughts are occurring by monitoring 3p accessible information (this is implicit in the idea that the brain is a classical information processor and its action instantiates consciousness), in which case it could be explained in 3p terms; but that doesn't mean the 1p stuff would suddenly cease to be any more that stat mech means that temperature ceases to exist.
Brent -- 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/d/optout.
