On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 7:48 PM Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> On 23 May 2020, at 01:31, Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 6:48 AM Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> If Holebo's theorem remains fundamental problems, then let's move >> everything into virtual reality, and repeat the experiment. >> >> In one case your friend's mind file is deleted and restored from a >> backup, and in another he continued without interruption. Do not the same >> conclusions I suggest follow? >> > > > Thought experiments in virtual reality (where you get to make up the laws > of physics) have no relevance for the world we observe. > > > It is relevant once you assume the minimal amount of Mechanism to make > sense of Darwin, or of Everett, etc. > > If you assume a primitive physical reality, you have to put something non > Turing emulable in the brain so that it can differentiate being run by that > physical reality from being run by arithmetic (which run all computations, > with a specific redundancy from which the physical appearances proceed. But > then, adding that non Turing emulable composant in the brain makes you > violating Mechanism. > Blah, blah, blah. Bruce > At least you are coherent. Unlike some others here, you don’t try to > defend both Mechanism and (weak) Materialism (the existence of some > ontological material reality). Now, I don’t think that there is any > evidences for such primary matter, and a lot of evidence for Mechanism > (from Darwin to QM many-histories). > -- 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/CAFxXSLSCmgXY70D12d1GrciqNJzjbodf5_H9939uJS%3D2L59ymg%40mail.gmail.com.
