> On 18 Sep 2019, at 12:02, Alan Grayson <agrayson2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think he means one can replace a human brain and/or nervous system with > computer microchips and consciousness will be preserved, or perfectly > simulated so the person who says "Yes doctor", will awake from the surgery > thinking he/she's the same person, like awakening from unremarkable surgery.
Yes, that is basically correct. A bit imprecise. To be sure, I do not claim that Mechanism is true. It is just my working hypothesis, and my point is that: 1) mechanism is incompatible with physicalism: physics becomes a branch of machine’s biology/psychology/theology/computer-science/elementary arithmetic. And indeed, I git very early that mechanism entails a physical reality which has a many “words/histories/alternate-relative-states, with a weird statistics, but it took me 30 years to see that the math confirms quantum mechanics (without collapse). > From my pov, this belief is a huge, huge stretch since we can even define > what consciousness IS. AG I guess you meant “”...since we can even define what consciousness IS”. We cannot even define what is a physical universe. There are very few things that we can define about “reality” (not even “reality”), but that does not prevent us to know or to have a good idea about those thing. I agree with you that consciousness is not definable, nor knowledge, nor truth, but consciousness is what we know the best, and is the only indubitable thing we are confronted with. Actually I define, or “meta-define” consciousness by something 1) true 2) knowable 3) indubitable Yet, 4) not provable, and, importantly, as you say 5) not definable in the language available by the entity concerned, unless through adherence to a notion of truth (mathematical logic explains how to give sense to this). In that sense, not only the machine is conscious, but do find that theory of consciousness, including the fact that physics has to be retrieved from that theory of consciousness, making it refutable. I predicted most quantum weirdness from this, and was not far from believing I was refuting Mechanism, until I realise (thanks to Everett) that the physicists were already there. Before that I have used quantum mechanics + collapse just a tool in molecular biochemistry. Bruno > > -- > 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/c959ae4d-feb0-4568-83f0-04cc981cfdd7%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c959ae4d-feb0-4568-83f0-04cc981cfdd7%40googlegroups.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/F0D2F8E4-A37B-4686-A2ED-C4438C305314%40ulb.ac.be.
