John Mikes responded:
At 09:17 AM 4/22/2004, you wrote:
Hal,
snip
I consider an 'observer' (unqualified as to 'its' feature-essence)
anything that acknowledges information. A second step, leading
to my substitute definition of the ominous consciousness - rather
pan-sesitivity, a related term for
Dear Hal,
Your question is one that I have been trying to address for a long time.
Since we have to consider the notion that an observer cannot have itself
directly as an object of experience, it seems to me that we can instead
consider how the observables of one observer are different from an
At 05:27 21/04/04 -0400, Kory Heath wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote a 10-point argument about determining whether or not
we are simulated by some massive computer. Here is point 9 from that post:
9) Now, from computer science and logic, startlingly enough perhaps,
we can isolate a measure on the 1-p
Hal,
here is my unprofessional and outsider 'meaning' which I developed
in my decade-long battle against the undefined (openly (mis)used)
term of "consciousness":
I consider an 'observer' (unqualified as to 'its' feature-essence)
anything that acknowledges information. A second step, leading
to
4 matches
Mail list logo
