Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

There are many levels of consciousness.  They don't all include self-consciousness.  Depending on its program it's unlikely that your personal computer is self-aware or has any preference for being on in the future. Brent On 4/5/2020 9:32 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: If your computer was

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

On 4/5/2020 7:53 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: There Roger Penrose says as much, after this point. > @58min (approx.) Penrose: quantum-state "collapse" produces proto-consciousness, the opposite of consciousness produces the "collapse" "Roger Penrose: Physics of

Re: Higgs Field

On 4/5/2020 2:01 AM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 11:24:46 PM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: Is there any theory which attempts to explain why the Higgs Field induces different rest masses in standard model particles, and in some cases such a photons, there is

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

Watched the entire video, but do not know what to make of it. It cannot be because I am a physicalist . Could it be his use of language and definitions are imprecise? On Saturday, April 4, 2020 at 4:07:25 AM UTC-4, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FHLjHC-soU > >

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

If your computer was conscious as you are, then you should not turn it off, at least permanenty - never to turn it on again. Ending its elexrical flow would be like ending the blood flow to your brain. The computer would not like that for itself, as you would not like that for yourself.

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

On Sun, Apr 5, 2020, at 13:18, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > On Sunday, April 5, 2020 at 7:26:02 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 4 Apr 2020, at 22:33, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List >>> wrote: >>> >>> I quite agree with Strawson that physics, and science in general, doesn't >>>

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

On Sunday, April 5, 2020 at 7:35:11 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 5 Apr 2020, at 01:11, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > I agree completely with Strawson that the type of qualia-free > computational approach suggested by some is nothing but *zombieism*. > > > > The whole point of

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

On Sunday, April 5, 2020 at 7:26:02 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 4 Apr 2020, at 22:33, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote: > > I quite agree with Strawson that physics, and science in general, doesn't > tell us about the ding und sich of

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

> On 5 Apr 2020, at 01:11, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > I agree completely with Strawson that the type of qualia-free computational > approach suggested by some is nothing but zombieism. The whole point of incompleteness is that it assures that the logic of []p & p, which is undefinable

Re: Best lecture (so far) on 'consciousness'

> On 4 Apr 2020, at 22:33, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > I quite agree with Strawson that physics, and science in general, doesn't > tell us about the ding und sich of consciousness or anything else. But I > notice that he completely avoids any similar level description or

Re: Higgs Field

On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 11:24:46 PM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: > > Is there any theory which attempts to explain why the Higgs Field induces > different rest masses in standard model particles, and in some cases such a > photons, there is no interaction with the Higgs Field? TIA, AG >