I appreciate that there are genuine problems in the theory of computation as
applied to intelligent and/or conscious minds. However, we know that
intelligent and conscious minds do in fact exist, running on biological
hardware. The situation is a bit like seeing an aeroplane in the sky then
Dear Stathis,
Two points: I am pointing out that the non-interactional idea of
computation and any form of monism will fail to account for the necessity
of 1st person viewpoints. I am advocating a form of dualism, a process
dualism based on the work of Vaughan Pratt.
Le 14-mai-05, à 07:44, Lee Corbin a écrit :
No, it is not just erroneous. I know of many thoughtful
people, and include myself as one of them, who believe that
the so-called mind body problem is some sort of verbal or
linguistic problem.
I can agree with that, but then we should solve that
Le 15-mai-05, à 15:40, Stephen Paul King a écrit :
Two points: I am pointing out that the non-interactional idea of
computation and any form of monism will fail to account for the
necessity of 1st person viewpoints.
You know that the necessity of 1st person viewpoints is what I
consider the
Dear Bruno,
As for your showng of necessity of a 1st personviewpoint , I still do
not understand your argument and that is a failure on my part. ;-) As to
Pratt's ideas, let me quote directly from one of his papers:
http://boole.stanford.edu/pub/ratmech.pdf
Some of the questions however
From Tipler's March 2005 paper The Structure of the World From Pure Numbers:
Can the structure of physical reality be inferred by a pure mathematician? As
Einstein posed it, Did God have any choice when he
created the universe? Or is mathematics a mere handmaiden to the Queen of the
Sciences,
Why am I not surprised that I disagree with this response?- Original Message - From: "Stathis Papaioannou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Many worlds theory of immortality Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 23:25:28 +1000 The obvious and sensible-sounding
7 matches
Mail list logo
