I don't disagree with any of your examples and ideas below. I agree
that consciousness deals with models of the world (assuming there is a
world). I agree that time is just sequence (I referred to the
"sequential aspect of consciousness). But ISTM that each of your
examples implicitly or
On Apr 20, 3:27 am, Jason Resch wrote:
> If I sent you an arbitrary binary string, it would have no meaning
> unless you either knew in advance how to interpret it or how it was
> produced. Either interpretation or understanding of how it was
> produced can be described with computer programs, b
On Apr 20, 8:14 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> The drawback is that any physical system (which could be mapped onto
> any information or any computation) would be conscious. This is only a
> drawback if you believe, I guess as a matter of faith, that it is
> false.
Right, the "Putnam mapping
On Apr 20, 2:04 am, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> The main difficulty I see is that it fails to explain the sequential
> aspect of consciousness. If consciousness is identified with
> information then it is atemporal.
>
Time is just the dimension of experience. But experience is an
internal "psychol
Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 20 Apr 2009, at 14:50, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>
>> Jason Resch wrote:
>>
>>> I think in regards to conscious, you can't have one without the
>>> other.
>>> Both information and computation are needed, as the computation
>>> imparts meaning to the information, and
Jesse Mazer wrote:
> Brent Meeker wrote:
> > I think "meaning" ultimately must be grounded in action. That's why
> > it's hard to see where the meaning lies in a computation, something
> that
> > is just the manipulation of strings. People tend to say the meaning is
> > in the interpretation, not
Brent Meeker wrote:
> I think "meaning" ultimately must be grounded in action. That's why
> it's hard to see where the meaning lies in a computation, something that
> is just the manipulation of strings. People tend to say the meaning is
> in the interpretation, noting that the same string of
On 20 Apr 2009, at 14:14, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> 2009/4/20 Kelly :
>>
>> What is the advantage of assigning consciousness to computational
>> processes (e.g. UDA), as opposed to just assigning it to the
>> information that is produced by computational processes?
>>
>> For example, to tak
On 20 Apr 2009, at 14:50, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> Jason Resch wrote:
>> I think in regards to conscious, you can't have one without the
>> other.
>> Both information and computation are needed, as the computation
>> imparts meaning to the information, and the information accumulates
>> meaning
Jason Resch wrote:
> I think in regards to conscious, you can't have one without the other.
> Both information and computation are needed, as the computation
> imparts meaning to the information, and the information accumulates
> meaning making each computation and its result more meaningful.
>
>
2009/4/20 Kelly :
>
> What is the advantage of assigning consciousness to computational
> processes (e.g. UDA), as opposed to just assigning it to the
> information that is produced by computational processes?
>
> For example, to take Maudlin's "Computation and Consciousness" paper,
> if you just
I think in regards to conscious, you can't have one without the other.
Both information and computation are needed, as the computation
imparts meaning to the information, and the information accumulates
meaning making each computation and its result more meaningful.
If I sent you an arbitrary bi
12 matches
Mail list logo
