On Tuesday, 2 August 2016, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 8/1/2016 12:56 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On 1 August 2016 at 17:04, Bruce Kellett <[email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote: > > >> I do not think that any "spooky action at a distance" is necessary. To >> think that it is necessary for one consciousness to inhabit two distinct >> bodies is to make a physicalist assumption -- namely, to identify >> consciousness with the activity and content of a single brain. If we drop >> that assumption, consciousness, *per se*, is not tied to a single >> location -- it could be in several places (or times) at once without the >> need for any physical connection (that is what non-locality is all about). >> > > A duplicate of my brain with the same inputs would, under the physicalist > assumption, have the same experiences. That would mean that I could not say > which brain my consciousness was linked to; if one brain were destroyed, my > experience would continue uninterrupted. On the contrary, it would require > a non-physicalist theory of some sort if the consciouness of two identical > brains could be distinguished. > > > But "identical" means having the same inputs. So you're agreeing with > Bruce that if duplicated brains getting different inputs (because they are > in physically different locations) have the same experiences, i.e. they > both experience perceptions related to the two locations, then they are > instantiating only one consciousness. If one were destroyed, the single > consciousness might continue without the perceptions of the other (like > closing one eye) or it might experience some other diminution. That's the > empirical question. > It's an empirical question, but there's no reason to believe the copies will develop magical powers. > Personally, I suspect something like Dennett's multiple drafts is right > model. Already in you brain there are modules dealing with different > perceptions, as in Bruce's example of driving. He is conscious of the > traffic and road and the car, but at a different level than musing over > philosophical problem at the same time, and he may also be listening to the > radio via another module. What we call "conscious thoughts" are just the > winners among these modules who are competing to be the ones that enter the > memory narrative; the answer to the question, "What did you think about > while driving home, dear?" > > 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] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','everything-list%[email protected]');> > . > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
