> On 16 May 2019, at 01:54, Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 4:53 AM Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be > <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote: > On 14 May 2019, at 00:34, Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com > <mailto:bhkellet...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> That may well be the case, but I fail to see the relevance of such an >> observation. My consciousness supervenes on my brain as it is now — > > With mechanism, and I think with QM, your brain is only a map where you can > find what realised your computation. You have as much brain (at least) than > there is electron position available in each orbital. If the quantum > determines the substitution level, i.e. we would need the precision permitted > by the Heisenberg Uncertainties, then what I say above would be literally > true. You have an infinity of “apparent brains” distributed in the (sigma_1) > arithmetical reality, and your consciousness (direct memories + direct > anticipation) depends on this. > >> it does not supervene on other possibilities. If you think it does, then >> prove it! > > If you think that some matter or god can select a computation among all the > one in arithmetic, it is sup to you to explain how that matter can do that. > Assuming Mechanism: that is impossible. > > > So don't assume Mechanism! It is then perfectly possible!
Only with a “god made it” type of explanation. > The "infinity of computations in arithmetic" are only an illusion after all. Then 2+2=4 is an illusion too, and physics is based on illusion, again. > I can describe my brain by using a particular computational model if you > like, but then it is the physical brain that determines which computation > might serve to describe it. No other selection is necessary. But that is what gives matter some magic ability. How could I say yes to the doctor, who might use different matter than the usual organic one. > > You seem to forget that if mind supervenes on the brain, then that is all > there is to it. No, with mechanism, mind supervenes locally on matter, but matter supervenes on the mind of all universal machines, which compete below our substitution level, and that explains directly the “many-world” appearances of matter and consciousness, where the physical threes have to introduce magical things, from the collapse of the ave to primary substance. Physics is *the* best way to make predictions, but even to relate such predictions to some reality, physics is mute (it not even its subject matter), but physicalism needs an unknown non computational theory of mind. That makes primary matter a quite speculative notion, for which we lack evidence. It like a creationist who would say that the theory of evolution is wrong, because it does not explain how God made all this in six days. Bruno > > Bruce > > -- > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLR5Bp4sCkkAfOdexx_yHrQDCWKJfy2NLB%2BXd2YVVX%3DxCA%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLR5Bp4sCkkAfOdexx_yHrQDCWKJfy2NLB%2BXd2YVVX%3DxCA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/B1EDEFBA-3566-4828-88F7-97FD93B1241E%40ulb.ac.be.
