Bruno Marchal
At 23:35 03/06/03 +1000, Colin Hales wrote:
Dear Folks,
Once again I find myself fossicking at the boundaries and need to
ask
one of those questions. My first experience with an asker of such a
question was in the last couple of years at high school. I'll tell
you about it
Hi
Been lurking a few weeks, feeling a little overwhelmed by how much more
everyone seems educated on the topic than I've managed to absorb through
my own casual readings. Internet geek, psychonaut from South Africa, no
formal education. :-)
(Apologies for length - so much I want to cover)
R
Just a note. Think of a brain more than just an intake valve, reacting to
similar stuff, and not so similar stuff. There are so many things we need to
take into consideration. Genetics. We are born with a specific preprogramed
set of organization and hardware. the way the neurons are
I think your idea makes sense.
Just like the distance between two particles is not 'nothing' but a real
property of the universe at that time (therefore there are 3 things in
mary's brain), also the specific configuration of neurotransmitters and
electrical impulses in the brain is something not
Hi,
From: Mirai Shounen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think your idea makes sense.
Just like the distance between two particles is not 'nothing'
but a real
property of the universe at that time (therefore there are 3 things
in
mary's brain), also the specific configuration of
On Tuesday, June 3, 2003, at 03:17 PM, Colin Hales wrote:
Re the latter thought:
Can I suggest reading a pile of Daniel Dennett? The
'representationalist' or its extremum: the eliminativist end of
consciousness is, as are all other philosophical positions as far as I
can tell, both right and
My physics is decades-old first-year U level (I'm a computer science type).
But if I'm not mistaken, there's no such thing as a 2C speed, or a 2C
closing
of separation between two objects. All speeds can only be measured
from some reference frame that is travelling with one of the objects
(say
Colin Hales wrote:
The real question is the ontological status of the 'nothing' in that
last sentence. I am starting to believe that the true nature of the
'fundamental' beneath qualia is not only about the 'stuff', but is
actually about all of it. That is, the 'stuff' and the 'not stuff'.
So.
At 23:35 03/06/03 +1000, Colin Hales wrote:
Dear Folks,
Once again I find myself fossicking at the boundaries and need to ask
one of those questions. My first experience with an asker of such a
question was in the last couple of years at high school. I'll tell
you about it because, well, the
9 matches
Mail list logo
