On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:39:34AM +, Michael Rosefield wrote:
This distinction between physicalism and materialism, with materialism
allowing for features to emerge, it sounds to me like a join-the-dots puzzle
- the physical substrate provides the dots, but the supervening system also
On 11/12/2008, at 4:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10/12/2008, at 4:45 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Here, below, is the plan of my heroic attempt (indeed) to explain
why
I think that: IF we assume that we are machine,
Never understood what people meant by a machine.
Actually I was
Hi Kim,
I recall the plan, the definition of machine, and then I comment
your last post. I do this for preventing we get lost (or not lost) in
a fractal conversation, which could be nice, but which is infinite,
and we have to not abuse of Wei Dai hospitality. Right?
The
On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 09:43:47AM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Michael Lockwood distinguishes between materialism (consciousness
supervenes on the physical world) and physicalism (the physical world
suffices to explain everything). The difference between the two is
that in physicalism,
4 matches
Mail list logo
