On 15 Sep 2016, at 13:44, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 15 September 2016 at 05:25, Stephen Paul King <[email protected]
> wrote:
Hi Stathis,
I really like this explanation of supervenience. I only worry
that we need a lot more detail, of how exactly "A and B are
unaffected if the timing, order or duration of a and b are changed."
works. AFAIK, this requirement looks a lot like mutual independence,
but it clearly can not be. There must be a non-zero probability of
transitions within the processes at each level of the tower,
something like a 'time' at each.
Information about timing, order or duration of a and b that does not
change a and b cannot change A and B either. This follows from the
definition of supervenience.
That brings me to my next question: Where do we get the
inequality of entropy when it is NOT at equilibrium for a system.
Deriving an arrow of time is not just a matter of figuring out how
to chain labels in observer moments, we need an actual transition
from one state to another in our theory.
Does anyone here have a nice explanation of Markov Processes that
they could point me to?
If there are real processes occurring in real time, this is not
necessarily relevant to the supervenient mental processes. A future
mental state could be computed in real time before a past mental
state; it could have happened to you right now, and you wouldn't
know. Thus, even if there is a real world, with real time and an
arrow of time, the subjective world is timeless.
OK. In the 3-1 picture, where we look at the cloud of true (and
prouvable) sigma_1 sentences, that seems quite reasonable.
Before smoking salvia, I would have added: but *only* in the 3-1
picture. I would have defended the idea that in the 1p picture, the
(1p) subjective experience is bounded to get some duration/subjective-
time aspects, like Brouwer, Bergson, Dogen and other Heracliteans
seemed to claim, and even like the universal machine seems to claim
([]p & p, the 1p, leads to a logic of intuitionist time) but salvia
succeeded in making me doubt about this. Salvia can be *quite*
dissociative.
Still today, I doubt that consciousness without time makes subjective
sense, but I believe there might be an altered consciousness state
where we feel to live the contrary. Coming back from that state is a
highly surprising and highly confusing experience. We can memorize
only a piece of that coming back.
Bruno
--
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.
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
