On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:13 AM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 4/22/2019 6:32 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 7:51 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On 4/22/2019 4:24 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 3:16 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 5 Nov 2018, at 02:56, Martin Abramson <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Consciousness is a program. >>> >>> >>> Consciousness might be related to a program, but is not a program, that >>> would identify a first person notion with a third person notion, like a >>> glass of bear and its price. >>> >>> >>> >>> It explores whatever entity it finds itself within and becomes that >>> creature's awareness of the world. For humans it becomes the identity or >>> soul which responds to anything that affects the organism. It can be >>> uploaded into a data bank but otherwise it dissipates with death. >>> >>> >>> >>> How? We can attach a soul to a machine, but a machine cannot attach its >>> soul to any particular computations, only to the infinity of (relative) >>> computations, and there is at least aleph_zero one, of not a continuum. >>> >>> Bruno >>> >>> >>> >> The above reminded me of this quote from Alan Turing: >> >> Personally I think that spirit is really eternally connected with matter >> but certainly not always by the same kind of body. I did believe it >> possible for a spirit at death to go to a universe entirely separate from >> our own, but now I consider that matter and spirit are so connected that >> this would be a contradiction in terms. It is possible however but unlikely >> that such universes may exist. >> >> Then as regards the actual connection between spirit and body I >> consider that the body by reason of being a living body can ``attract´´ and >> hold on to a ``spirit,´´ whilst the body is alive and awake the two are >> firmly connected. When the body is asleep I cannot guess what happens but >> when the body dies the ``mechanism´´ of the body, holding the spirit is >> gone and the spirit finds a new body sooner or later perhaps immediately. >> >> >> It seems otiose to postulate a separate spirit. A pitiful attempt to >> grasp immortality. Isn't it plain that what is "immaterial" and >> distinguishes a brain of a rock is that the brain instantiates processes >> which incorporate memory, purpose, perception, and action. >> > > > Is it otiose to make a distinction between a "story" and a "book", or a > "program" and a "computer", or might there be value in that nuance? > > Clearly a program stops executing locally when a computer executing that > program is destroyed, but of course this says nothing about the > destruction, existence, non-existence, continuation, quantity, or locations > of other instances of that program. > > > It does if that program was unique, as any program capable of learning is > likely to be. > This assumes a finite universe and reality (which we have much reason to doubt). > > I think here Turing was making a similar point, in the nuanced distinction > between a mind and a brain. > > > I quite agree with the distinction between mind and brain. But why should > we imagine it is different from the distinction between a locomotive and > transportation, between a ship and a voyage, between a factory and > manufacturing? > I don't follow. Jason -- 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.
