On 8/1/2016 12:35 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:


On Tuesday, 2 August 2016, Brent Meeker <[email protected] <mailto:[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.

But it's not magical if you've already thrown out physics and propose to derive everything from airthmetic. You can't then go back and help yourself to physics.

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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to