Rich,
are you familiar with the work of R.D. Laing? He was the illustrious
founder of the anti-psychiatry movement in the 60s. One never hears
of him these days. He had all the other thinkers on the hop for quite
a while. Your thoughts represent no interruption whatsoever.
Kim
On
Russell Standish writes:
Even though it is very unlikely to happen in reality, it is easy
enough to imagine that the relatively minor physical/psychological
changes that have occurred in the past day are exaggerated, so that
instead of changing from me-yesterday to me-today, I change from
I read the remark of Russell and Satathis's reply with
great interest.
Russell wrote (among others):
*
...The change into
Napoleon is a difference in kind, not degree, as
one would have to
pass through non-functional brain structures in
order to change from me to him.
*
reflecting a
L'esprit de l'escalier:
after reading my post below as an interesting
list-post it occurred that I left out an important
addage:
I may feel as the same person (self) in my earlier
life and situations - I do not IDENTIFY with 'it'. I
know: it is me but not I am like that. Not even:
I was like that
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:15:33PM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
I don't see why you are so sure about the necessity of passing through
non-functional brain structures going from you to Napoleon. After all,
there is a continuous sequence of intermediates between you and a
fertilized
Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:15:33PM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
I don't see why you are so sure about the necessity of passing through
non-functional brain structures going from you to Napoleon. After all,
there is a continuous sequence of intermediates
There must exist a ''high level'' program that specifies a person in terms
of qualia. These qualia are ultimately defined by the way neurons are
connected, but you could also think of persons in terms of the high-level
algorithm, instead of the ''machine language'' level algorithm specified by
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 26-mai-06, à 19:35, Tom Caylor a écrit :
Bruno,
You are starting to perturb me! I guess that comes with the territory
where you're leading us.
You should not worry too much. I confess I am putting your mind in the
state of mathematicians before the Babbage
I meant that it makes intuitive sense that you *cannot* sequence
effectively on all computable growing functions.
Tom
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group,
9 matches
Mail list logo
