On Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:00:39 AM UTC+10, Liz R wrote: > > On 21 August 2014 04:55, John Clark <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > >> >> There is nothing logically inconsistent about a fire breathing dragon >> powered by a nuclear reactor in its belly, but that doesn't prove that such >> an animal actually exists. >> > > Unless you believe that QM necessarily entails a multiverse, in which case > they exist somewhere. > > >> > Gödel's theorem might show that mathematics is more than mere >>> formalism, but it does not allow us to make the leap to mathematics being >>> more than abstract relationships between numbers. >>> >> >> What else could maths be, apart from abstract relationships between > numbers? > > My point precisely Liz. So how do subjective experiences get into it? Comp is based on the yes doctor bet or the assumption that consciousness arises from computations. I'm pointing out the basic unexplained oddness of this, which seems odder once we abstract away the physical machine - at least then we could imagine some physical "magic" putting the consciousness in, though I'll admit physical magic is a pretty shit explanation too!
> (Maybe that word "abstract" causes problems? It's possible (if comp is > correct) that "abstract" relations are more real than real ones.) > -- 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.
