On 24 Feb 2012, at 06:20, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/23/2012 6:00 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 7:21 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 2/23/2012 2:49 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
As wild or counter-intuitive as it may be though, it really has no
consequences to speak of
On 24 Feb 2012, at 21:51, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
I certainly will. In the meantime, do you have an
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:20 PM, acw a...@lavabit.com wrote:
Pain - immediate actions, random or not, to specific dangerous stimuli.
Aversion/avoidance in more complex organisms (such as those capable of
expecting or predicting painful stimuli).
Pleasure - reduced or repeated same actions, to
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:17 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 24 Feb 2012, at 21:51, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM,
On 2/25/2012 7:15 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:20 PM, acwa...@lavabit.com wrote:
Pain - immediate actions, random or not, to specific dangerous stimuli.
Aversion/avoidance in more complex organisms (such as those capable of
expecting or predicting painful stimuli).
Saying evolution created pain and pleasure is a bit of a cop out. When we
say evolution created mammals, we can theorize about a progression of
material forms (and environments) that led to mammals.
So *how* did evolution do that? What sort of progression could you theorize
about that led to pain
On 23 Feb 2012, at 23:49, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 22 Feb 2012, at 23:07, Terren Suydam wrote:
Here was the aha! moment. I get it now. Thanks to you and Quentin.
Even though I am well aware of the consequences of MGA, I
On 2/24/2012 5:54 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
Saying evolution created pain and pleasure is a bit of a cop out. When we say evolution
created mammals, we can theorize about a progression of material forms (and
environments) that led to mammals.
So *how* did evolution do that?
Of course
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:12 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/24/2012 5:54 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
Saying evolution created pain and pleasure is a bit of a cop out. When we
say evolution created mammals, we can theorize about a progression of
material forms (and environments)
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
I certainly will. In the meantime, do you have an example from Damasio
(or any other source) that could shed light on the pain/pleasure
phenomenon?
Terren
http://www.hedweb.com/bgcharlton/damasioreview.html
--
You received this message because you
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
I certainly will. In the meantime, do you have an example from Damasio
(or any other source) that could shed light on the pain/pleasure
phenomenon?
Terren
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
I certainly will. In the meantime, do you have an example from Damasio
(or any other source) that
On 2/24/2012 20:51, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Terren Suydamterren.suy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
I certainly will. In the meantime, do you have an example
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:47 PM, acw a...@lavabit.com wrote:
On 2/24/2012 20:51, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Terren Suydamterren.suy...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM, Terren Suydam
On 2/24/2012 22:20, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:47 PM, acwa...@lavabit.com wrote:
On 2/24/2012 20:51, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Terren Suydamterren.suy...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 22 Feb 2012, at 23:07, Terren Suydam wrote:
Here was the aha! moment. I get it now. Thanks to you and Quentin.
Even though I am well aware of the consequences of MGA, I was focusing
on the physical activity of the
On 2/23/2012 2:49 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
As wild or counter-intuitive as it may be though, it really has no
consequences to speak of in the ordinary, mundane living of life. To
paraphrase Eliezer Yudkowsky, it has to add up to normal. On the
other hand, once AGIs start to appear, or we begin
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 7:21 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/23/2012 2:49 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
As wild or counter-intuitive as it may be though, it really has no
consequences to speak of in the ordinary, mundane living of life. To
paraphrase Eliezer Yudkowsky, it has to add
On 2/23/2012 6:00 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 7:21 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/23/2012 2:49 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
As wild or counter-intuitive as it may be though, it really has no
consequences to speak of in the ordinary, mundane living of life. To
2012/2/21 Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com
Bruno and others,
Here's a thought experiment that for me casts doubt on the notion that
consciousness requires 1p indeterminacy.
Imagine that we have scanned my friend Mary so that we have a complete
functional description of her brain (down
On 21 Feb 2012, at 21:34, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
wrote:
On 2/21/2012 8:32 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
So if Mary is not conscious in the deterministic scenario, she is a
zombie. The only way to be consistent with this conclusion is
On 21 Feb 2012, at 18:05, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/21/2012 8:32 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
Bruno and others,
Here's a thought experiment that for me casts doubt on the notion
that
consciousness requires 1p indeterminacy.
Imagine that we have scanned my friend Mary so that we have a
complete
On 22 Feb 2012, at 15:49, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
On 21 Feb 2012, at 18:05, meekerdb wrote:
But is it really either-or? Isn't it likely there are different
kinds and
degrees of consciousness. I'm not clear on what
On 2/22/2012 14:49, Terren Suydam wrote:
However I don't understand how Mary could have anything but a single
continuation given the determinism of the sim. How could a
counterfactual arise in this thought experiment? Can you give a
concrete example?
Mary's brain/SIM implementation is
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 22 Feb 2012, at 15:49, Terren Suydam wrote:
Hey Bruno,
I seem to remember reading a while back that you were saying that the
1p consciousness arises necessarily from the many paths in the UD. I'm
glad to clear up my
On 2/21/2012 8:32 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
Bruno and others,
Here's a thought experiment that for me casts doubt on the notion that
consciousness requires 1p indeterminacy.
Imagine that we have scanned my friend Mary so that we have a complete
functional description of her brain (down to some
On Feb 21, 11:32 am, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote:
So if Mary is not conscious in the deterministic scenario, she is a
zombie. The only way to be consistent with this conclusion is to
insist that the substitution level must be at the quantum level.
If OTOH she is conscious,
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 21, 11:32 am, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote:
So if Mary is not conscious in the deterministic scenario, she is a
zombie. The only way to be consistent with this conclusion is to
insist that the
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/21/2012 8:32 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
So if Mary is not conscious in the deterministic scenario, she is a
zombie. The only way to be consistent with this conclusion is to
insist that the substitution level must be at
On 2/21/2012 12:34 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/21/2012 8:32 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
So if Mary is not conscious in the deterministic scenario, she is a
zombie. The only way to be consistent with this conclusion is to
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 4:01 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/21/2012 12:34 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
The idea that consciousness depends on the program a UM executes is
the point of this thought experiment. The idea that consciousness
itself depends on a multiplicity of
On 2/21/2012 2:45 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 4:01 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/21/2012 12:34 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
The idea that consciousness depends on the program a UM executes is
the point of this thought experiment. The idea that consciousness
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 7:47 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/21/2012 2:45 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 4:01 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 2/21/2012 12:34 PM, Terren Suydam wrote:
The idea that consciousness depends on the program a UM executes
33 matches
Mail list logo
