On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
On a peculiar blind spot in materialists
Materialists have a peculiar blind spot
in that they do not understand what is meant by
the subject/object distinction. The difference
between subjective and objective being.
On 26 May 2013, at 19:08, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote:
Materialism fails to account for the first person
Can non-materialism do better and if so how?
Yes, by using the mathematical theory of self-reference. The only
problem is that
On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote:
Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is
immaterial. If the universe is infinitely large or infinitely
varied, we each reappear an
On 27 May 2013, at 01:12, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 05:05:28PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 13:29, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an
organism from experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence
On 27 May 2013, at 05:05, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
Understood, Jason. I became familiar with this digital universe
concept, first, through Hans Moravec, in Mind Children. I wonder how
possible it is to discover that we are part of an ancestor simulation?
By reasoning, taking the FPI
On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote:
Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is
immaterial. If
the universe is infinitely
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote:
Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe is
On Mon, May 27, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Can non-materialism do better and if so how?
Yes, by using the mathematical theory of self-reference.
I've never heard of the mathematical theory of self-reference. And it's
no great mystery, the only difference between you and
On 5/27/2013 10:19 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 04:00,
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 5/27/2013 10:19 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at
On 27 May 2013, at 19:10, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 20:23, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/26/2013 1:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 26 May 2013, at 04:00, meekerdb wrote:
Whether or not it is recorded or extractable in this universe
is
Bruno,
With MWI are some universes less probable than others.
I have difficulty understanding how a universe can be statistical.
I think I understand the frequency argument. But that does not make sense
either.
Richard
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On
On 27 May 2013, at 19:28, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Can non-materialism do better and if so how?
Yes, by using the mathematical theory of self-reference.
I've never heard of the mathematical theory of self-reference.
Have you heard
On 5/27/2013 11:16 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 5/27/2013 10:19 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
2013/5/27 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net
On 5/27/2013 1:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Bruno:
do you indeed exclude the other animals from being selfconcious? or -
having a logic on their own level? Or any other trait we assign (identify?)
for humans - in our terms?
A question about plants (rather: about being conscious):
you may feel free to define 'being conscious' in human
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 01:28:42PM -0400, John Clark wrote:
The details of this explains that the knower (Bp p)
Yet another of your homemade anagrams, this time it sounds like a oil
company not what a baby does to a diaper. I could probably figure out what
you mean if I thought about it
In a way, professor, Marchal, you seem to be on the side of Stephen
Wolfram, who once wrote about there being no need to ever do SETI,
because, if we wanted to know advanced Extra Terrestrial technologies,
it would be far, simpler to generate algorythems (sp) that contain
these unknown
On 5/27/2013 2:18 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno:
do you indeed exclude the other animals from being selfconcious? or - having a logic
on their own level? Or any other trait we assign (identify?) for humans - in our terms?
A question about plants (rather: about being conscious):
you may feel
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 07:42:11PM -0400, spudboy...@aol.com wrote:
In a way, professor, Marchal, you seem to be on the side of Stephen
Wolfram, who once wrote about there being no need to ever do SETI,
because, if we wanted to know advanced Extra Terrestrial
technologies, it would be far,
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 04:53:56PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
I don't think consciousness is an all-or-nothing property. You have
to ask Consciousness of what? There's consciousness of
surroundings: sound, photons, temperature, chemical
concentrations There's consciousness of internal
On 5/27/2013 5:08 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 04:53:56PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
I don't think consciousness is an all-or-nothing property. You have
to ask Consciousness of what? There's consciousness of
surroundings: sound, photons, temperature, chemical
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 05:44:57PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/27/2013 5:08 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 04:53:56PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
I don't think consciousness is an all-or-nothing property. You have
to ask Consciousness of what? There's consciousness of
22 matches
Mail list logo
