On 27 Mar 2015, at 11:24, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2015-03-27 10:12 GMT+01:00 LizR <[email protected]>:
On 27 March 2015 at 19:28, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
The ab asurdo is showing computationalism is incompatible with
physical supervenience, not that it is true.
Yes sorry, "reject" was a poor choice of words. I meant argue from
the comp position rather than the materialist one, and know what I'm
talking about.
In the end by being forced to accept consciousness must supervene on
the movie + broken gate... If you believe it, then you've abandon
computationalism as a theory of the mind as the movie+broken gates
is not a computation... Or you can keep computationalism and abandon
physical supervenience.... QED
Yes I realise that. The same applies to Maudlin. All I wanted to
know at the moment was how the contradiction arises in the MGA.
It seems to me that's what I explained... it arises because under
computationalism, it is assumed consciousness is supported by a
computation.... under computationlism + physical supervenience, it
assumed the computation is eventually supported by physcial activity
and eventually this leads to attribute consciousness to the record,
which is not a computation, contradicting the assumption of
computationalism...
Yes, in fact consciousness is attribute to the person manifested by
the computation. The computation can be done by a physical device. The
problem is to attribute consciousness to the physical activity itself
(and not the person), it makes consciousness supervening on the movie,
but the movie has no decoding making it univocally related to that
conception. I think Brent mentionned this, the movie can be a movie of
a different computation on some other brain or computer. It really
makes no sense to attribute a computation or a movie to a description
of a computation. It is akin to confuse the number 0 and the symbole
"0". For "real time supervenience" the stroboscope shows it being
meaningless, because the time a movie is projected can be made
arbitrary, which is illustrated with the stroboscope. When I have more
time I can re-explain it, or people can search stroboscope in the
archive, as we did not tlak on this so much.
Bruno
Quentin
--
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.
--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy
Batty/Rutger Hauer)
--
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
