On Tuesday, October 22, 2019 at 6:59:52 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 22 Oct 2019, at 13:06, Philip Thrift <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 22, 2019 at 4:55:33 AM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote: >> >> I never understood this "if consciousness is all there is, then it is >> allpowerful". How does that follow ? >> > > You posit *consciousness is all there is*. > > How do you account for it having a finite existence (bounded by birth to > death of an individual)? > > With matter, there is an explanation. > > > Only through an identity thesis (brain-mind) which requires actual > infinities incompatible with Mechanism. > With mechanism we explain consciousness (the feeling of appearances) and > matter (why some of those feeling are first person plural and sharable, and > why it stabilises, … or not, which we can test). > > That does not make the mechanist explanation true, but it becomes > testable, and rather well test if we are willing to take seriously quantum > mechanics without collapse (à-la Everett). > > Bruno > > > But with pure arithmetic, it's the same problem as pure consciousness.
If consciousness is a pure arithmetical machine (PAM), why should PAM have a lifetime beginning (birth) and end (death)? A purely mathematical Turing machine exists outside time. It doesn't have a birth and a death. It just exists as Platonic mathematical abstraction for all time. @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/aae72905-9dcb-47fa-8cff-f61025e80996%40googlegroups.com.
