Re: I am my memory, which is provided by my 1p.

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:17 PM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Bruno Marchal > > My personal introspection will always have my personal > memory as context, which a computer will not have. > One can in fact say that I am my memory. My > memory is the identity of my 1p and is what my 1p sees. > > This

Re: Re: Re: Re: Introspection (internal 1p) has been dropped bycognitivescience

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 08:16:45AM -0500, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Russell Standish > > 1) Introspection is subjective because it is only > only available to me: it is personal and private (1p), > not public (3p). By modelling your mind by introspecting my own, I can have a fair idea what you ar

Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 5:33:26 PM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote: > > > > > 2012/12/11 Craig Weinberg > > >> >> >> On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 4:41:04 PM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote: >>> >>> You are mixing species. The human specie has his nature. The sea horse, >>> as fine as it is, h

Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 4:41:04 PM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote: > > You are mixing species. The human specie has his nature. The sea horse, as > fine as it is, has another. human males are more aggresive for the same > reason that sea horse females are aggressive too: the other sex does

Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 3:46:23 PM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote: > > Yes, I sent a search link for you to know the opinions about it. > > in EP this your example does not offer a clear hypothesis. But there are > others that are evident. It depends on the context. for example , woman > h

Re: Avoiding the use of the word God

On 12/11/2012 9:33 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: Dear Roger, It's called an attempt at humor. I apologize if it didn't meet your standards: I am a learner in comedy, not a knower. A point here which puts my attempt at humor directly on topic: I ask myself whether everybody is a TOE? And

Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows

Yes, I sent a search link for you to know the opinions about it. in EP this your example does not offer a clear hypothesis. But there are others that are evident. It depends on the context. for example , woman have more accurate facial recognition habilities, but men perceive faster than women f

Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 2:06:32 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 12/11/2012 11:04 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > Try it this way. Let's say we are measuring the difference in how long it > takes to recognize a friend versus recognizing a stranger and we find that > there is a clear differen

Re: Mental causes and effects (those outside of spacetime)

On 12/11/2012 9:14 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stephen P. King 1) If I cut my hair, my fingerprints don't change. Monads continually and rapidly undergo changes (in their perceptions and appetites), but their identites (their souls, their DNA, their fingerprints, who they are, their names) do not

Re: Against Mechanism

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 1:40:58 PM UTC-5, William R. Buckley wrote: > > Also, we do not experience a reality. We experience something > (consciousness, mainly) and we extrapolate reality from that, and from > theories already extrapolated. > > > > > > Bruno has it down! > > > Agree

Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows

On 12/11/2012 11:04 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Try it this way. Let's say we are measuring the difference in how long it takes to recognize a friend versus recognizing a stranger and we find that there is a clear difference. Yeah, we don't recognize the stranger. Brent -- You received this me

Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and emotional, brain study shows

On Monday, December 10, 2012 5:09:25 AM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote: > > Craig: The evolutionary Psychology hypothesis are > falsifiable

RE: Against Mechanism

Also, we do not experience a reality. We experience something (consciousness, mainly) and we extrapolate reality from that, and from theories already extrapolated. Bruno has it down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" g

Re: Against Mechanism

On 12/11/2012 9:53 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 12:48 AM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/10/2012 10:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/10/2012 10:16 AM, Jaso

Re: Against Mechanism

On 12/11/2012 9:31 AM, Jason Resch wrote: in simpler theories, like the CTM or Everett QM. Everett's QM is not a theory; it's just an interpretations. Not quite. Deutsch's proposed experiment with reversible computation and an AI yields different results for the CI and MWI, thus t

Re: Against Mechanism

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 1:07:16 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > Your servitor: > > 1) Arithmetic (comp) > > :) > > Bruno > To which I add: 0) That which perceives, understands, participates, and gives rise to comp. :) Craig -- You received this message because you are subscrib

Re: Against Mechanism

On 12/11/2012 9:23 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:05 AM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/11/2012 6:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/10/2012 2:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at

Re: Against Mechanism

On 11 Dec 2012, at 18:09, meekerdb wrote: On 12/11/2012 7:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:30, meekerdb wrote: On 12/10/2012 2:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But why isn't "It's a probabilistic world and it obeys the Born rule." a good explanation. I'm all for finding a

Re: Against Mechanism

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 12:48 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/10/2012 10:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/10/2012 10:16 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/10/2012 2:56 AM,

Re: Against Mechanism

On 11 Dec 2012, at 18:05, meekerdb wrote: On 12/11/2012 6:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/10/2012 2:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 02:03, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 6:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/9/2012 4

Re: Against Mechanism

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 12:23:08 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:05 AM, meekerdb > > wrote: > >> On 12/11/2012 6:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:25, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 12/10/2012 2:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 10 D

Re: Against Mechanism

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:09 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/11/2012 7:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:30, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/10/2012 2:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > But why isn't "It's a probabilistic world and it obeys the Born rule." a > good explanation. I'm

Re: Against Mechanism

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:05 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/11/2012 6:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:25, meekerdb wrote: > > On 12/10/2012 2:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 10 Dec 2012, at 02:03, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 6:51 PM, meekerdb

Re: Avoiding the use of the word God

On 11 Dec 2012, at 17:16, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: but if the bet is laid open and reasoning somewhat sincere, then I'll listen to a mystic over some dull philosopher or scientist and their linguistic labyrinths any day. I do

Re: Against Mechanism

On 12/11/2012 7:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:30, meekerdb wrote: On 12/10/2012 2:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But why isn't "It's a probabilistic world and it obeys the Born rule." a good explanation. I'm all for finding a better explanation, i.e. a deterministic one. B

Re: Against Mechanism

On 12/11/2012 6:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/10/2012 2:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 02:03, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 6:51 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/9/2012 4:37 PM, Jason

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Avoiding the use of the word God

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > but if the bet is laid open and reasoning somewhat sincere, then I'll listen > to a mystic over some dull philosopher or scientist and their linguistic > labyrinths any day. I do not even try to learn comedy. Yet I learn from mysti

Re: I am my memory, which is provided by my 1p.

> > My >> memory is the identity of my 1p and is what my 1p sees. >> >> This is perhaps the most serioous problem of comp. >> > > Frankly I can understand people not convinced that a computer can > have a quale associated to the memory, but memory and personal memory does > not pose any probl

Re: I am my memory, which is provided by my 1p.

On 11 Dec 2012, at 13:17, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My personal introspection will always have my personal memory as context, which a computer will not have. This is weird. Personal computer have already personal memory, even if today they borrow it from their user. But personal

Re: Whoopie ! The natural INTEGERS are indeed monads

On 10 Dec 2012, at 20:25, John Mikes wrote: Bruno, I wonder if you know German proverbs: "Wirf die Katz' wie du willst, sie faellt auf die Fűsse (throw the cat as you wish, she falls onto her feet). We have it in french. In fact cat really falls onto their feet :) Bruno J On Mon, Dec

Re: Against Mechanism

On 10 Dec 2012, at 19:54, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > From whose perspective is there a single unique result? From my perspective! Whenever I, the simple non-godlike experimenter, send a photon (or electron) through 2 slits and it hits a photo

Re: Against Mechanism

On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:30, meekerdb wrote: On 12/10/2012 2:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But why isn't "It's a probabilistic world and it obeys the Born rule." a good explanation. I'm all for finding a better explanation, i.e. a deterministic one. But simply postulating an ensemble of wo

Re: Against Mechanism

On 10 Dec 2012, at 17:25, meekerdb wrote: On 12/10/2012 2:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2012, at 02:03, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 6:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/9/2012 4:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 5:40 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/9/

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Avoiding the use of the word God

Dear Roger, It's called an attempt at humor. I apologize if it didn't meet your standards: I am a learner in comedy, not a knower. A point here which puts my attempt at humor directly on topic: I ask myself whether everybody is a TOE? And is the ability to share that some measure for quality? By

Re: Re: Re: Re: Introspection (internal 1p) has been dropped bycognitivescience

Hi Russell Standish 1) Introspection is subjective because it is only only available to me: it is personal and private (1p), not public (3p). 2) Computers are 3p cannot read my 1p mind. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/11/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Avoiding the use of the word God

Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy Every new generation attacks what the previous generation holds dear. Freud explained that in his theory of the Oedipal complex. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/11/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the fol

I am my memory, which is provided by my 1p.

Hi Bruno Marchal My personal introspection will always have my personal memory as context, which a computer will not have. One can in fact say that I am my memory. My memory is the identity of my 1p and is what my 1p sees. This is perhaps the most serioous problem of comp. [Roger Clough]