On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 01:41:46PM +1200, LizR wrote: > On 9 May 2015 at 13:07, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:02:29AM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > > > In 1987, when I present the argument, in the room some come up with > > > similar idea, and I answered. But some told me after that when > > > people come up with idea like a recording is conscious, or 2+2 might > > > > Really? Why are people so quick to accept that conscious recordings > > are absurd? Sure I can understand that Bogie in the screen version of > > Casablanca is not conscious, but that is not the sort of recording > > we're talking about. Here we're talking about something like an EEG > > pattern where every neuron is recorded, as well as the entire > > connectome. Why is it any more absurd for that to be be conscious than > > it is for the original lump of grey goo to be conscious? > > > I suspect that saying a recording is conscious is seen as a form of > eliminativism - the thinking is something like, if a recording can be > conscious, then consciousness can't actually exist. >
How does that work? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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.
