On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> Matter is a possible means to implement universal machine. That is of > course in need to be explained when we assume comp. > And this is a example of why I'm so certain that regardless of what you say "comp" is NOT just a abbreviation for computationalism. Computationalism says that consciousness is what matter does when it is organized in certain ways and we could prove that proposition the same way we could prove any 2 things are equivalent. When we change the ways the neurons in our brain operate (through chemicals or electricity or physical movement etc) our consciousness changes, AND when our consciousness changes we also note that the way our neurons work changes. Therefore nobody needs to assume computationalism because we already know for a fact that it's true, and yet you constantly tell us that we must "assume comp" therefore despite your protests to the contrary I must conclude that whatever "comp" means it's not computationalism. Nothing personal but when you say one thing and logic says something else I must side with logic. John K Clark -- 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.
