Brent Meeker:
snip
Observation involves (necessitates) the AGI having experiences, some of
which are an experiential representation of the external world. The
process of generation of the experiential field(s) involves the
insertion
of the AGI in the chain of causality from that which
Colin Hales wrote:
Brent Meeker:
snip
Observation involves (necessitates) the AGI having experiences, some of
which are an experiential representation of the external world. The
process of generation of the experiential field(s) involves the
insertion
of the AGI in the chain of causality
Le 10-oct.-06, à 16:08, 1Z a écrit :
If your Platonism is about truth, bot existence, you cannot show
that matter is redundant,
Ah! I am glad you see my argument is a redundancy argument. If comp is
true we cannot rely on the hypothesis of primary matter to explain even
just the
Le 11-oct.-06, à 02:26, 1Z a écrit :
David Nyman wrote:
But this conclusion
is, I think, why Bruno thinks that 'matter' has no real explanatory
role in the account of conscious experience. This isn't quite
equivalent to claiming that it can't be the primary reality, but
rather
to claim
Le 10-oct.-06, à 22:41, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
Bruno:
you wrote:
...I do believe that 5 is equal to 1+1+1+1+1, ...
Why not 1+1+1+1+1+1+1?
Because it is equal to six.
you had a notion somewhere in your mathemaitcally
instructed mind that you have to stop at exactly the 5th
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 10-oct.-06, à 16:08, 1Z a écrit :
If your Platonism is about truth, bot existence, you cannot show
that matter is redundant,
Ah! I am glad you see my argument is a redundancy argument. If comp is
true we cannot rely on the hypothesis of primary matter to
Le 11-oct.-06, à 05:46, George Levy a écrit :
snip: I will comment at ease later>
Therefore from the point of view of the second machine, the first machine appears conscious. Note that for the purpose of the argument WE don't have to assume initially that the second machine IS conscious, only
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 10-oct.-06, à 16:08, 1Z a écrit :
If your Platonism is about truth, bot existence, you cannot show
that matter is redundant,
Ah! I am glad you see my argument is a redundancy argument. If comp is
true we cannot rely on the hypothesis of primary matter to
Bruno Marchal wrote:
That's a redundancy argument, not an incompatibility argument.
Yes.
We somethigists have a redundancy argument of our own.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything
Bruno Marchal wrote:
That's a redundancy argument, not an incompatibility argument.
Yes.
We somethigists have a redundancy argument of our own.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything
On Oct 11, 5:11 am, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it isn't possible to determine by inspection that they are
conscious.Are you claiming it's impossible in principle, or just that we
don't know how?
It may be impossible in principle (i.e. 1-person experience is
ex-hypothesi
On Oct 11, 5:11 am, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it isn't possible to determine by inspection that they are
conscious.Are you claiming it's impossible in principle, or just that
we don't know how?
It may be impossible in principle (i.e. 1-person experience is
ex-hypothesi
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
On Oct 11, 5:11 am, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it isn't possible to determine by inspection that they are
conscious.Are you claiming it's impossible in principle, or just that
we don't know how?
It may be impossible in principle (i.e. 1-person
snip
unless you can eyeball it you're not being scientific).
The subtlety with 'objective scientific evidence' is that ultimately it
is
delivered into the private experiences of indiividual scientists. Only
agreement as to what is evidenced makes it 'objective'. So the privacy
of
David Nyman wrote:
On Oct 11, 5:11 am, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it isn't possible to determine by inspection that they are
conscious.Are you claiming it's impossible in principle, or just that we
don't know how?
It may be impossible in principle (i.e. 1-person
15 matches
Mail list logo
