Thanks Quentin!

On 5 April 2018 at 15:03, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Le jeu. 5 avr. 2018 13:42, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>
>> On 4 April 2018 at 10:21, Russell Standish <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 08:25:59AM +0200, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>> >> Hi Russell,
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Russell Standish
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 05:14:21PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Now, is a jellyfish conscious?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I bet they are, but not far away from the dissociative and constant
>> >> >> arithmetical consciousness (of the universal machines).
>> >> >
>> >> > As I'm sure you're aware, I disagree with this. Jellyfish appear to
>> >> > be
>> >> > quite simple automatons, with a distributed neural network, not any
>> >> > brain as such. However, my main reason for disagreeing is that
>> >> > anthropic reasoning leads us to conclude that most species of animal
>> >> > are not conscious. Our most typical animal is a nematode (for
>> >> > instance
>> >> > your favourite - the planarians), but even most insects cannot be
>> >> > conscious either.
>> >>
>> >> I follow your anthropic reasoning, but am not convinced by the
>> >> implicit 1:1 correspondence between one minute of human consciousness
>> >> and one human of insect consciousness. I have no rigorous way of
>> >> saying this, but my intuition is the following: there is more content
>> >> in one minute of one than the other. I think it makes sense for the
>> >> probabilities to be weighted by this content, somehow.
>> >>
>> >> Imagine a simple possibility: your anthropic reasoning being weighed
>> >> by the number of neurons in the given creature. See what I'm getting
>> >> at?
>> >>
>> >
>> > My argument is simply that your first observer moment (ie "birth
>> > moment", although not literally at birth) is selected at random from
>> > all such possible moments. Thereafter, successor OMs are chosen
>> > acording to Born's rule. Ant birth OMs are vastly more numerous than
>> > human ones. A city of perhaps a million individuals lives under our
>> > house, and ants are born, live an die far more rapidly than we
>> > humans.
>>
>> Ok, I see. I don't buy that first OMs have some special status. In my
>> view it makes sense to sample each OM from all possible OMs in the
>> universe. I think I am a block universe kind of person, and I think
>> that the feeling of continuity that we have in our lives is illusory,
>> in a sense. It's just that my current OM is a complexification of
>> other OMs, and that is what memory is. I am OM-centric, not
>> me-centric.
>>
>> > To argue that OMs might be weighted somehow is quite close to the
>> > ASSA, which I've never found convincing, though some argue for it here
>> > on this list. Why should first observer moments be weighted by neuron
>> > number?
>>
>> What is the ASSA?
>
>
> Absolute self sampling assumption... It means your next OM is sampled from
> the set of all possible OM.
>
> RSSA = relative self sampling assumption, means your next OM is sampled from
> the set containing the nearest OM relative to your current OM.
>
> Regards, Quentin
>>
>>
>>
>> > --
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
>> > Principal, High Performance Coders
>> > Visiting Senior Research Fellow        [email protected]
>> > Economics, Kingston University         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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>
> --
> 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.

-- 
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