On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 12:09:19 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 8 Sep 2019, at 12:51, Philip Thrift <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 5:40:55 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> > On 7 Sep 2019, at 07:14, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On 9/6/2019 9:51 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> I would put "Horganism" another way. >> >> >> >> Science tells stories/theories, and some are successful in their >> application. But we don't know if any of the stories are the final ones to >> be told, or even close to being final. (They probably are not.) There is no >> settled story of gravity yet, much less consciousness. One reads about a >> new story of gravity in science news every week, it seems. >> >> >> >> David Chalmers' conclusion is ... >> >> >> >> "I think that the Hegelian [dialectical] argument gives good reason to >> take both panpsychism and panprotopsychism very seriously. If we can find a >> reasonable solution to the combination problem for either, this view would >> immediately become the most promising solution to the mind–body problem. So >> the combination problem deserves serious and sustained attention." >> >> - http://consc.net/papers/panpsychism.pdf >> > >> > Zero predictive power and it's not clear that it's consistent with the >> rest of neurophysics. >> >> + zero explanation power at all, also. >> >> Bruno >> >> >> >> >> >> > But panpsychism more explanatory than consciousness from numbers. > > > > “Pan” is not well defined. The proposition "my cup of tea is conscious” > is not well defined for me. > > What is the panpsychist theory of consciousness? If everything is > conscious, “consciousness seems trivialised”. > > With the number, and their + and * laws, we can define the universal > digital machine, and study what they can prove about themselves, including > what they cannot prove, but still guess, and incompleteness makes the > standard definition of the greeks making sense. The universal machine has > already an interesting discourse about, not just his body, but its souls, > its physics, etc. > > It is coherent with both AI, and the theory of evolution (which is already > used on mechanism). > > Consciousness also get a role, as it provides semantic which accelerate > the computation relatively to the universal machine which run the subject, > allowing a greater number of degree of freedom. > > A very interesting video on the Limbic system, and its relation with > emotion is here: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAOnSbDSaOw > > Panpsychism assumes matter, making it inconsistent with digital mechanism > (that is not obvious, ask for explanation if interested). > But even without that still a bit ignored fact, panpsychism makes the > functioning of the brain quite mysterious. With mechanism, consciousness is > a mathematical semantic fixed point, related to the neural loops, whose > importance is well illustrated in that video. > > Panpsychism has not yet a testable theory, which might change tomorrow, > but again, it speculates on very strong axioms, which cannot be used to > invalidate a much simpler theory, not yet contradicted by any facts. > > Bruno > > > consciousness is a mathematical semantic fixed point, related to the neural loops
It depends on what the meaning of "is" is. "is" could be a descriptive relationship, like a program of a tornado is not a tornado. But if tornados are just mental creations, where everything mental is a numerical fixed point, then all reality *is* numerical simulation. @philipthrift -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/33931cf8-bf93-46b5-8a1d-3b2e810a12ea%40googlegroups.com.
