Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 02 Dec 2013, at 23:00, meekerdb wrote: On 12/2/2013 10:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But I don't think it's so simple as applying Occam's razor. In my example red is an experience that from the perspective of conscious thoughts may have no explanation, i.e. is fundamental. Like the guy in Washington cannot explain why he is the one in Washington. But we can explain why he cannot explain it, and in general we can explain why machines are first person confronted with arithmetical first person truth that they have to feel as fundamental and unexplainable. But from the perspective of biology has an explanation in terms of physics and chemistry. From an evolutionary perspective it has an explanation in terms of survival advantage. So Occam's razor cuts different ways depending on the perspective. This is an abstract base problem, but with comp the points of view don't depend on the choice of base machine, and we can refine the use of Occam razor for each points of view. In fact we can use it only one time, for the Turing universal ontology. They don't depend on the choice of base machine because you've chosen Turing computation as fundamental. I use Church thesis, and the hope/fear to survive a digital substitution at some level. That doesn't show that something else could not have been chosen as fundamental instead. Or that something has to give some helps to the universal persons distributed in the arithmetical reality. The Aristotelian God Matter fails in Comp, so let us look at the God of Plato, being quite open minded, because we are at the (eternal) beginning (of the machine's interview). The universal machine is not God (which is Truth), but it has an inner God which is the part agreeing with God (Truth). It is the first person experience. It allows experiences and knowledge states, deception too. Bruno Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 02 Dec 2013, at 05:37, meekerdb wrote: On 12/1/2013 12:12 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: but there is no known proof (or even an argument offered by materialists) that matter cannot be explained in terms of something simpler. Of course not. That would the point the it's fundamental. The point of Jason if I may, is that there is no way to explain numbers without assuming them... but there are ways to explain matter without assuming it. I'm not convinced of either of those points. And as I noted to be explained does entail that something cannot be fundmental, only that it might not be. OK, but then we use Occam razor. Thermodynamic cannot disprove the existence of invisible horse. Bruno Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 12/2/2013 1:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 02 Dec 2013, at 05:37, meekerdb wrote: On 12/1/2013 12:12 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: but there is no known proof (or even an argument offered by materialists) that matter cannot be explained in terms of something simpler. Of course not. That would the point the it's fundamental. The point of Jason if I may, is that there is no way to explain numbers without assuming them... but there are ways to explain matter without assuming it. I'm not convinced of either of those points. And as I noted to be explained does entail that something cannot be fundmental, only that it might not be. OK, but then we use Occam razor. Thermodynamic cannot disprove the existence of invisible horse. Of course I meant to write, And as I noted to be explained does NOT entail that something cannot be fundamental. But I don't think it's so simple as applying Occam's razor. In my example red is an experience that from the perspective of conscious thoughts may have no explanation, i.e. is fundamental. But from the perspective of biology has an explanation in terms of physics and chemistry. From an evolutionary perspective it has an explanation in terms of survival advantage. So Occam's razor cuts different ways depending on the perspective. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 02 Dec 2013, at 18:51, meekerdb wrote: On 12/2/2013 1:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 02 Dec 2013, at 05:37, meekerdb wrote: On 12/1/2013 12:12 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: but there is no known proof (or even an argument offered by materialists) that matter cannot be explained in terms of something simpler. Of course not. That would the point the it's fundamental. The point of Jason if I may, is that there is no way to explain numbers without assuming them... but there are ways to explain matter without assuming it. I'm not convinced of either of those points. And as I noted to be explained does entail that something cannot be fundmental, only that it might not be. OK, but then we use Occam razor. Thermodynamic cannot disprove the existence of invisible horse. Of course I meant to write, And as I noted to be explained does NOT entail that something cannot be fundamental. But I don't think it's so simple as applying Occam's razor. In my example red is an experience that from the perspective of conscious thoughts may have no explanation, i.e. is fundamental. Like the guy in Washington cannot explain why he is the one in Washington. But we can explain why he cannot explain it, and in general we can explain why machines are first person confronted with arithmetical first person truth that they have to feel as fundamental and unexplainable. But from the perspective of biology has an explanation in terms of physics and chemistry. From an evolutionary perspective it has an explanation in terms of survival advantage. So Occam's razor cuts different ways depending on the perspective. This is an abstract base problem, but with comp the points of view don't depend on the choice of base machine, and we can refine the use of Occam razor for each points of view. In fact we can use it only one time, for the Turing universal ontology. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 12/2/2013 10:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But I don't think it's so simple as applying Occam's razor. In my example red is an experience that from the perspective of conscious thoughts may have no explanation, i.e. is fundamental. Like the guy in Washington cannot explain why he is the one in Washington. But we can explain why he cannot explain it, and in general we can explain why machines are first person confronted with arithmetical first person truth that they have to feel as fundamental and unexplainable. But from the perspective of biology has an explanation in terms of physics and chemistry. From an evolutionary perspective it has an explanation in terms of survival advantage. So Occam's razor cuts different ways depending on the perspective. This is an abstract base problem, but with comp the points of view don't depend on the choice of base machine, and we can refine the use of Occam razor for each points of view. In fact we can use it only one time, for the Turing universal ontology. They don't depend on the choice of base machine because you've chosen Turing computation as fundamental. That doesn't show that something else could not have been chosen as fundamental instead. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 30 Nov 2013, at 22:40, meekerdb wrote: On 11/30/2013 4:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: In fact, materialism cannot explain matter, either. Worst, it avoids trying to explain it at the start. It's not worse, it's logic. Whatever is taken as fundamental in a theory is not something explained in the theory. Your theory takes numbers and arithmetic for granted. Computationalism has to take anything Turing universal at the start. Without something Turing universal, you get no Turing universal things, and so, numbers+add+mult (or anything recursively equivalent) is the minimal we need to start with. But for the physical there is a tradition of doubting that we have to take it in the basic assumption. it is the debate between Plato and Aristotle. Popular religion is the popular oversimplified (often for political reason) of Plato. There is no problem with a physicist taking matter for granted, or assuming it, even implicitly, when they do physics. There is a problem with metaphysics, or theology, or philosophy taking matter for granted, or not assuming it explicitly, because that becomes a huge lack of rigor, and makes it impossible to understand that mechanism is incompatible with materialism. The problem is not with physics, but with implicit physicalism, in a place where science has just not decided. It is a deny of ignorance, or an imposition of a dogma. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 12/1/2013 12:12 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: but there is no known proof (or even an argument offered by materialists) that matter cannot be explained in terms of something simpler. Of course not. That would the point the it's fundamental. The point of Jason if I may, is that there is no way to explain numbers without assuming them... but there are ways to explain matter without assuming it. I'm not convinced of either of those points. And as I noted to be explained does entail that something cannot be fundmental, only that it might not be. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 11/30/2013 4:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: In fact, materialism cannot explain matter, either. Worst, it avoids trying to explain it at the start. It's not worse, it's logic. Whatever is taken as fundamental in a theory is not something explained in the theory. Your theory takes numbers and arithmetic for granted. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 4:40 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/30/2013 4:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: In fact, materialism cannot explain matter, either. Worst, it avoids trying to explain it at the start. It's not worse, it's logic. Whatever is taken as fundamental in a theory is not something explained in the theory. Your theory takes numbers and arithmetic for granted. It is logical in the case of arithmetical realism to assume numbers are fundamental because it is provable that the numbers cannot be explained in terms of anything simpler, but there is no known proof (or even an argument offered by materialists) that matter cannot be explained in terms of something simpler. Jason -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 11/30/2013 7:36 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 4:40 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 11/30/2013 4:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: In fact, materialism cannot explain matter, either. Worst, it avoids trying to explain it at the start. It's not worse, it's logic. Whatever is taken as fundamental in a theory is not something explained in the theory. Your theory takes numbers and arithmetic for granted. It is logical in the case of arithmetical realism to assume numbers are fundamental because it is provable that the numbers cannot be explained in terms of anything simpler, I'd like to see that proof. I don't think 'red' can be explained in terms of something simpler - but that doesn't mean it's fundamental nor that it can't be explained. Simpler can be a complicated concept. but there is no known proof (or even an argument offered by materialists) that matter cannot be explained in terms of something simpler. Of course not. That would the point the it's fundamental. Brent -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
Why consciousness is not possible in materialism Two related definitions of consciousness are: 1. Consciousness is experience by the first person singular. 2. Consciousness is self-referential awareness. So consciousness requires that there be a self, or first person singular, to be aware. There is however no provision in materialism or analytic philoophy for such a self. Therefore materialism cannot explain consciousness. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism
On 30 Nov 2013, at 12:53, Roger Clough wrote: Why consciousness is not possible in materialism Two related definitions of consciousness are: 1. Consciousness is experience by the first person singular. 2. Consciousness is self-referential awareness. So consciousness requires that there be a self, or first person singular, to be aware. There is however no provision in materialism or analytic philoophy for such a self. This is not correct. Computer have self (or can get them easily), and a computer can be material a priori. The self is a structure control, and can be implemented materially, like any control structure. The trick has been explained very often in this list (cf Dx = xx = DD = DD). Therefore materialism cannot explain consciousness. That is correct, but for deeper reason than your incorrect argument above. In fact, materialism cannot explain matter, either. Worst, it avoids trying to explain it at the start. Bruno Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
