On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:52 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 22 Sep 2014, at 06:46, LizR wrote: > > Surely Bruno doesn't think *anything *capable of (or having the potential > for) computation is conscious? > > > > I hope my answer to Brent has clarified this. > > It is clearer when said in the theory. We have the numbers 0, 1, 2, 3, ... > Some are universal, and most are not. > > They are universal, it means that they have some non trivial coding (in > most base). The universal numbers, I tend to think nowadays, are conscious. > But that consciousness too is, from its 1p view, indeterminate on complex > FPI domains, very large, and it takes some (logical) time for such > consciousness to be aware of the differentiations. > The universal (or sub-universal, technically) might be the initial > consciousness state which differentiates on most cogent personal histories. > > What is counterintuitive is that this state of consciousness is so much > amnesic that it is literally out of time. > > Here, contrary to Brouwer theory of consciousness, which Brouwer relate to > time, it seems the brain can delude you up to make you identifying with > something out of time. It is pure madness? Is it inconsistent? Well, it > helps to get how He lost Himself in His, or Her Mother Creation. Why soul > falls? Why consciousness differentiates? In a sense it is "just" universal > machines reflecting their incompleteness and building layers and layers of > universal domains. A physical universe is a sort of tool by which universal > numbers explore the arithmetical reality. There are just tuns of unknown > awaiting us in all directions. Somehow "we" build the measure, through > dialog with universal layers, but we is more general than humans. > > The 1p of the machine (S4Grz) is close to Brouwer, but it is an open > problem if that can be used to make that consciousness out of time a > genuine 1p logical contradiction. > > That assumption would provide the comp explanation to illumination in some > rough way, by PA getting amnesic up to forget the induction axioms. PA > would be enlightened when he remember what is feels like being RA. > I speculate something like this can be related to by some poison experience, trance, sexual peak from 1p. Perhaps a strange kind of perspective closer to internal statement like "It's certainly something rather than nothing.", "Amazing", "Me is" and "other" rather than "I think about myself" or "past, present, future", more like "pain is!" or "pleasure is!" rather than "I feel pain/pleasure", which can even be quite pleasant from time to time. > Again, I am close to rambling perhaps. I don't use this in my publication, > to be sure. > If you are rambling, than I am rambling times rambling. Apologies for weird speculation, but it's the kind I find fascinating. PGC -- 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.
