On 2/23/2015 7:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 23 Feb 2015, at 01:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/22/2015 3:43 PM, LizR wrote:
On 23 February 2015 at 12:32, meekerdb <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 2/22/2015 2:52 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 3:17 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Computationalism is an extraordinary claim.
For it to be extraordinary, it would have to be beyond ordinary. However
computationalism isn't just ordinary but its the majority opinion among
philosophers of mind.
Not as Bruno uses it: That all computations exist Platonically and
instantiate all
possible thoughts - and a lot of other stuff.
That is a deduction, not a postulate.
A deduction from what? That arithmetic exists
To say that "arithmetic exists" is ambiguous. The UDA-deduction use only Church Thesis
and "yes doctor". The AUDA deduction use only Church thesis (to motivate the sigma_1
restriction).
But "yes doctor" is also ambiguous. Does it mean that a physical substitution is possible
(which most people believe) or does it mean that an abstract computation is enough. And
don't say that's invoking 'magic'. A physical substitution, according to QM, entails
entanglement with the environment. Which is why I think the MG argument only shows that
movie graph simulation will work within a world simulation - not within this world.
Brent
and there's a mapping from true theorems of PA to numbers?
Only the usual (and non computable!) mapping between arithmetical proposition to {yes,
no}. Physicists use them too.
They use that they are true relations, not the the referents 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.
