On 12/08/2011, at 1:06 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> Sure, muscles will contract for any old material that can conduct an
> electric current. A muscle doesn't require a high level conversation
> with the brain's cells to react. We can move in our sleep when we
> aren't subjectively conscious of
On 11 Aug 2011, at 19:24, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/11/2011 7:14 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
In any case, I have made the thought experiment simpler by *assuming*
that the replacement component is mechanically equivalent to the
biological tissue. We can imagine that it is a black box animated b
On 11 Aug 2011, at 14:16, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 11, 1:14 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
The conclusion is that such a device is
impossible because it leads to conceptual difficulties.
Consciousness itself leads to conceptual difficulties. Except for the
fact that we cannot ignore th
On 11 Aug 2011, at 08:55, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 8/11/2011 1:14 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Stephen P. King> wrote:
Please explain what would you think would happen if you replaced
part
of your brain with an unconscious component that interacted
nor
On Aug 12, 4:21 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On 12/08/2011, at 1:06 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > Sure, muscles will contract for any old material that can conduct an
> > electric current. A muscle doesn't require a high level conversation
> > with the brain's cells to react. We can move in
On Aug 12, 5:01 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 11 Aug 2011, at 14:16, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > On Aug 11, 1:14 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> >> The conclusion is that such a device is
> >> impossible because it leads to conceptual difficulties.
>
> > Consciousness itself leads to conceptua
On Aug 12, 5:05 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 11 Aug 2011, at 08:55, Stephen P. King wrote:
> > What special sauce? Why is it ok to assume that consciousness is
> > something special that can only occur is special circumstances? Why
> > not consider that possibility that it is just as prim
On 8/12/2011 2:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 11 Aug 2011, at 19:24, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/11/2011 7:14 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
In any case, I have made the thought experiment simpler by*assuming*
that the replacement component is mechanically equivalent to the
biological tissue. We can
On 11.08.2011 22:46 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/11/2011 1:04 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say now that consciousness is conscious perception. The
main problem in my view though is who follows the narrative. Does
your theory answer such a question?
I'd say "You do", there's no
On 12.08.2011 00:00 Craig Weinberg said the following:
On Aug 11, 4:04 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
I would say now that consciousness is conscious perception. The
main problem in my view though is who follows the narrative. Does
your theory answer such a question?
Just as an image is an agreem
On 8/12/2011 11:00 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 11.08.2011 22:46 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/11/2011 1:04 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say now that consciousness is conscious perception. The
main problem in my view though is who follows the narrative. Does
your theory answer s
On Aug 12, 2:00 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
> This the point that I do not understand. The question is here more what
> exactly is the observer in my body. Presumably it is the brain. Then it
> first constructs the world that I observe, than it observes the
> constructed world. It is completely unc
On 12.08.2011 20:40 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/12/2011 11:00 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 11.08.2011 22:46 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/11/2011 1:04 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say now that consciousness is conscious perception.
The main problem in my view though is wh
On 12.08.2011 20:47 Craig Weinberg said the following:
On Aug 12, 2:00 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
This the point that I do not understand. The question is here more
what exactly is the observer in my body. Presumably it is the
brain. Then it first constructs the world that I observe, than it
ob
Dear Pilar,
as your fellow "Not-English-Mothertongue" guy. I point to the*incompleteness
* in this language:* "Nothing" - "EXISTS" not.* It isn't. But it is bad
English to write:
* "Why 'is-not' nothing?"* so we have a discussion point. In my
(non-IndoEuropean) mothertongue the question is exact
On Aug 12, 3:41 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
> It would be interesting to see how do you know this. Some revelation or
> something else?
I don't know it, I just think that it could be the case. If you can
fully and finally reject the proposition that your own experiences
could be metaphysical, then
On 8/12/2011 12:37 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 12.08.2011 20:40 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/12/2011 11:00 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 11.08.2011 22:46 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/11/2011 1:04 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
...
I would say now that consciousness is conscious percep
"What is there? Everything! So what isn't there? Nothing!"
--- Norm Levitt, after Quine
On 8/12/2011 1:02 PM, John Mikes wrote:
Dear Pilar,
as your fellow "Not-English-Mothertongue" guy. I point to the*
incompleteness* in this language:*/ "Nothing" - _"EXISTS"_ not./* It
isn't. B
Dear John, thank you for the feedback. My comments below..
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 4:02 PM, John Mikes wrote:
> Dear Pilar,
>
> as your fellow "Not-English-Mothertongue" guy. I point to the*incompleteness
> * in this language:* "Nothing" - "EXISTS" not.* It isn't. But it is bad
> English to wr
On 8/12/2011 2:08 PM, Pilar Morales wrote:
I see you take it for granted that "the Universe was born". Was it
indeed? Maybe "OUR" universe was, but I speak about the "World"
(Multiverse, none of them necessarily identical in any sense) in
which we inhabit a pretty simple one with
Brent,
Is it possible that zero could have negative charge, positive charge, and
neutral charge?
Which reminds me, why is it that the photon doesn't have an anti-particle
other than itself? It makes no sense to me that Bosons for the most part
don't have antimatter equivalents. I would think that
On 8/12/2011 4:33 PM, Pilar Morales wrote:
I was following the conversation on consciousness and life and was
trying to find out if there's a relationship between the number of
Bosons and Fermions in living organisms (as units and as parts of
larger more complex organisms) versus their ratio in
On Aug 12, 8:28 pm, Pilar Morales wrote:
>gravitation and magnetism are manifestations of the same force,
> just different reactions to interactions.
I think that is the case also. To me it seems possible that gravity,
like time, is not a true primitive phenomenon, but actually how the
epiphenom
On 8/12/2011 5:28 PM, Pilar Morales wrote:
Brent,
Is it possible that zero could have negative charge, positive charge,
and neutral charge?
Zero is the cardinality of the empty set. It's not part of the physical
world.
Which reminds me, why is it that the photon doesn't have an
anti-parti
On Aug 12, 9:55 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> Photons don't carry charge. If they did they'd interact with other
> photons and we wouldn't be able to see anything.
Would you say that what we see is photons? Even in our dreams?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Grou
Are you the kind of person who knows math?
http://videosift.com/video/Miss-USA-2011-Should-Math-Be-Taught-In-Schools
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:22 PM, meekerdb wrote:
>> John Searle claims to be a physicalist but he believes that if
>> part of your brain is replaced by a functionally identical computer
>> chip your behaviour will remain the same but your consciousness will
>> fade away. Incidentally, Searle acce
On Aug 12, 11:18 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> Noticing is distributed, but the parts of the brain are
> interconnected. Visual perception occurs in the visual cortex, then
> the information may be sent to the limbic system causing an emotional
> reaction to what is seen and the language centr
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:55 PM, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 5:28 PM, Pilar Morales wrote:
>
>> or a magnetron, which to me, gravitation and magnetism are manifestations
>> of the same force, just different reactions to interactions.
>>
>
> Andre Sakharov wrote a famous paper that suggests gra
On 8/12/2011 7:01 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 12, 9:55 pm, meekerdb wrote:
Photons don't carry charge. If they did they'd interact with other
photons and we wouldn't be able to see anything.
Would you say that what we see is photons? Even in our dreams?
No.
--
You recei
On Aug 13, 12:26 am, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 7:01 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:> On Aug 12, 9:55 pm,
> meekerdb wrote:
>
> >> Photons don't carry charge. If they did they'd interact with other
> >> photons and we wouldn't be able to see anything.
>
> > Would you say that what we see is photo
On 8/12/2011 8:18 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
It can be noticed separately in that hemisphere but if it is not
communicated it will be a separate consciousness.
I think we have almost converged to agreement here. If the AI part
communicates to the brain hemisphere just as the brain part
On 8/12/2011 9:33 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 13, 12:26 am, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/12/2011 7:01 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:> On Aug 12, 9:55 pm,
meekerdbwrote:
Photons don't carry charge. If they did they'd interact with other
photons and we wouldn't be able to see anything.
David,
In regard to my point that "non-existence" itself (not our mind's
conception of non-existence) is actually an existent state, you
suggest that
equating the "existence" of some state with the "absence" of all
existent states is a direct contradiction.
But, it's only a contradiction if
34 matches
Mail list logo
