Re: The dovetailer disassembled

> No, I am not. Cats are made of matter, but not all things made of matter are cats -- some are dogs, some are rocks, and so on. I think the major thrust here is not that you need a miracle to get consciousness out of matter, although that is part of what Bruno is saying. Instead, his point is tha

Re: The dovetailer disassembled

I don't really see why that's necessary... Every moment feels like it's now. Idk, it helps to picture a 2d universe where time for those in the 2d universe is a spatial one in our universe. The 2d universe would consist of a stack of slices or pages, like a flip book that makes an animation when yo

Re: Translation in the Fourth Spatial Dimension

Thanks Liz! You're awesome in every dimension :) On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, LizR wrote: > ana and kata if I remember correctly. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https:

Re: Translation in the Fourth Spatial Dimension

... *Spatial* 4th dimension. Not a temporal movement On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, Jason Resch wrote: > Past/Future > > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Dennis Ochei > wrote: > >> What are the terms for it? We have up/down left/right forward/backward >> ??/?? ? &g

Translation in the Fourth Spatial Dimension

What are the terms for it? We have up/down left/right forward/backward ??/?? ? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubs

Re: The Prestige (Spoiler Alert) and First Person Indeterminacy

Computer scientist's "or". If you read it that way it's a yes or no question. "Misreading" an exclusive or as an inclusive or is often used in CS/Math jokes. He's also indicating that his model of personal identity allows branching, i.e. you're both. If you think you will be the Prestige beforeh

Re: The dovetailer disassembled

Ohhh, were talking about philosopher-physicist Spinozoan God. Hmmm wasn't this thread originally about how the word "God" muddies the waters... On Sunday, May 3, 2015, LizR wrote: > On 4 May 2015 at 09:41, Dennis Ochei > wrote: > >> Err "God created the natur

Re: The dovetailer disassembled

Err "God created the natural numbers" is a rather meaningless proposition in my mind. What does that even mean? God just decided that there were such things as numbers? The existence of numbers depends on the whim of God? I can imagine someone inventing unary, or a system based on powers of 10, or

Re: God

*something.* Existing in Platonia makes us necessary, while the need for actualization renders us contingent, and thus wanting for explanation. On Sunday, May 3, 2015, John Clark wrote: > > > On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 2:02 AM, Dennis Ochei > wrote: > > > Hmmm... I don't

Re: God

Hmmm... I don't think Godel's result implies that mathematical truth isn't "out there" in Platonia, in fact the very idea of inprovable truth implies mathematical realism, that truth stretches beyond what man-made contrivances can grasp. Godel showed that all the truths in Platonia simply cannot be

Re: God

How do decimals even work in unary? On Saturday, May 2, 2015, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/2/2015 5:12 PM, John Clark wrote: > > >> > I accept the idea that the 10^100^100 digit of pi exists, but what is > it? If physics doesn't know what it is then maybe nothing else does either; > I certainly have

Re: The dovetailer disassembled

http://www.mprinstitute.org/vaclav/Hoyle.htm This seems to be what Liz was referencing. It looks like what inspired Kolak's "Consciousness and the Cosmic Towers" from his book "I am You." On Wednesday, April 29, 2015, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > On 30 April 2015 at 13:20, Bruce Kellett > wrot

Re: The dovetailer disassembled

> A single-bit adder consists of 2 inputs and 2 outputs, which are basically the exclusive or and the and of the two input bits. Why not go more basic? Which god do you serve, NAND or NOR? On Tuesday, April 28, 2015, Russell Standish wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 12:34:28PM +1000, Bruce Kelle

Re: crime and duplication machines

wrote: > On 4/27/2015 5:29 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > > You could just execute/imprison the two remaining actors > > Well, i thought it was obvious that you can't just walk down the street > and stop them... I didn't realize I had to spell that out. > > > You

Re: crime and duplication machines

gt; (a) that will deter similar schemes and (b) they are "would be murders". > > Brent > > On 4/27/2015 4:42 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > Right, but *who* to punish in order to deter is dependent on these > questions of identity. Suppose there are three actors who are willing

Re: crime and duplication machines

Right, but *who* to punish in order to deter is dependent on these questions of identity. Suppose there are three actors who are willing to do this delayed duplication murder suicide scheme. Furthermore, they don't care what happens to their duplicate. (Perhaps they think of him as someone else) Ho

Re: crime and duplication machines

That only holds if you were planning the murder before you dupped. On Monday, April 27, 2015, LizR wrote: > On 28 April 2015 at 08:58, Jason Resch > wrote: > >> What if you step into a delayed duplication machine, and the first one >> out goes and commits murder at a later time, and then commit

Re: God

I tend to agree that the word God has way too much baggage. I feel like it's used to induce a fictitious sense of agreement. If you said you believed in God, no one would think you were referring to the material universe or arithmetic. You would be performing an act of deception on them. On Monday

Re: Practicalities of Mind Uploading

Hmm... I think you can speed this up if you precompute and stick the answers in a lookup table. Of course, you still have to calculate the index of the answer On Sunday, April 26, 2015, Russell Standish wrote: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 12:22:21PM -0500, Jason Resch wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 24, 201

Re: crime and duplication machines

il 26, 2015, Russell Standish wrote: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 01:50:47PM -0700, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > indeed. The memory criterion reveals itself to be problematic the moment > > you consider partial transfers. If you transfer all my memories, we've > > decided, per t

Re: crime and duplication machines

n ideas in your head. Of course there is no way the American legal system will be able to keep up with this, so it's gonna be a field day if and when memory transfers are possible. On Sunday, April 26, 2015, Dennis Ochei wrote: > indeed. The memory criterion reveals itself to be

Re: crime and duplication machines

lower their level of abstraction to memes. A memeplex caused a body to act in a certain way. At the mind On Friday, April 24, 2015, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > > On Saturday, April 25, 2015, Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> Here's the clincher. >> >> 1. Suppose

Re: crime and duplication machines

Only temporarily. I leave myself instructions on where to restore my memories On Friday, April 24, 2015, LizR wrote: > On 25 April 2015 at 05:52, Dennis Ochei > wrote: > >> Here's the clincher. >> >> 1. Suppose I erase my body's memories after. Do I go

Re: crime and duplication machines

Here's the clincher. 1. Suppose I erase my body's memories after. Do I go to jail? 2. Suppose I erase the memories of this body. I find another body (say a laboratory synthesized one with no memories) and download my memories onto it. Does the new body go to jail? 3. I commit a crime and then

Re: Practicalities of Mind Uploading

Where can I sign up to be a part of Cosmic Liz? =p I've wondered if there exists an observer moment with all other observer moments as part of its consistent history. I wonder what God's favorite dream is? On Thursday, April 23, 2015, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegrou

Re: God

suppose that I don´t need to explain what are the consequences of that > second standpoint. This is the standpoint of scientism, when scientific > disciplines that have consequences for human politics are taken as a > politic-religious ideology, as knowledge above and beyond belief. > > &

Re: The Object

My discrete mathematics professor once said "there are two types of students: those you can't teach mathematics and those you don't have to." I got a kick out of that -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this

Practicalities of Mind Uploading

In the thread discussing comp the topic of whether uploading is possible came up. While tangentially related to comp, objections on the grounds of practical impossibility miss the point. But! The topic is still very interesting. Is uploading possible? If so, when will we have it? What fidelity

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

I'll roll one out On Thursday, April 23, 2015, LizR wrote: > On 23 April 2015 at 21:30, Dennis Ochei > wrote: > >> Yeah... we've been off topic for a while... >> >> That doesn't worry me in itself, but it does mean that things that aren't >

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

p then the question of importance is > whether a brain is Turing emulable at any level (which includes whether > physics is Turing emulable). If it is, then either the argument goes > through, or one of Bruno's other premises is wrong, or there is a mistake > in his argument. >

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

Short of bringing the brain down to absolute zero, im not sure that stopping all brain processes is physically meaningful. we could talk about stopping all action potentials. I think you might see short term memory loss with this but you can probably reboot. On Thursday, April 23, 2015, Bruce Kell

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

I mean you're not asking if the suspension maintained your personality or your memories or what youe favorite food is. At this point we are assuming all these things are preserved. Yours is not a question of technical difficultly What you are instead asking is, will the conscious entity before and

God

wave the flags of "science" and "reason", that > is, thae ones that claim knowledge without conscience that what they have > is some kind of faith based on a particular metaphysics. are the most > dangerous ones. > > These people like you are the ones that t

Re: God

o my question about "what are the NUMBERS" from him. > I consider 'computation' as (Lat) com (cum) - putare (thinking), mind's > work, to add 2 and 2 together, definitely not restricted to the numberical > terms. It may be also to add an animal, or plant to an envir

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

comp. On Wednesday, April 22, 2015, meekerdb wrote: > On 4/22/2015 12:26 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > Certainly we could scan a nematode, don't you think? 302 neurons. > Nematodes should say yes doctor. If I had a brain tumor, rescinsion of > which would involve damaging the 1

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

Certainly we could scan a nematode, don't you think? 302 neurons. Nematodes should say yes doctor. If I had a brain tumor, rescinsion of which would involve damaging the 1000 neurons and there was a brain prothesis that would simulate a their function I should say yes doctor. Since modelling 1000 n

Re: God

Awesome! Thanks! On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 Dennis Ochei > wrote: > > > What are the other forums that people on everything list go to? How deep >> does the rabbit hole go? > > > I've been posting to the Extropian Li

Re: God

Lol, don't make me write a webcrawler that looks for LizR On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, LizR wrote: > I don't mind, as long as there's a nice soft pile of leaves at the bottom. > > On 22 April 2015 at 14:26, Dennis Ochei > wrote: > >> What are the other foru

Re: God

ty...! > > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/foar > > > On 22 April 2015 at 13:42, Dennis Ochei > wrote: > >> FOR? >> >> >> On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, LizR > > wrote: >> >>> On 22 April 2015 at 08:43, John Clark wrote: >

Re: God

FOR? On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, LizR wrote: > On 22 April 2015 at 08:43, John Clark > wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 , LizR > > wrote: >> >> > In order to participate in a forum like this you need to accept that >>> certain shorthands are commonly used. >>> >> >> None of Bruno's shorthands o

Re: God

I'm not gonna lie, i find this exchange rather entertaining. I dont know what side I'd pick, but I will say I've never been 100% clear on what Bruno meant by Aristotelian or Platonist before now. What does Bruno do with personal pronouns? I have to agree that at least some of Bruno's written corres

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

, 2015, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > On 21 April 2015 at 08:43, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > > Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> > >> On 20 Apr 2015, at 09:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: > >> > >>> Dennis Ochei wrote: > >>>> > >>>> One must r

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

pr 2015, at 09:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > > > > >>Dennis Ochei wrote: > > >>>One must revise the everyday concept of personal identity > > >>>because it isn't even coherent. It's like youre getting mad at > > >>>him for explain

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

Right, mobility is irrelevant. I mispoke. On Monday, April 20, 2015, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> Oh i see the issue. I didn't realize you'd assume the scanner is >> immobile. Immobilizing it relative to everything in the universe is uhhh... >

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

No one cares who inherits the farm. Subjective expectation is the crux of personal identity. You can't tell me that whether i wake up in Moscow depends on whether or not a reconstruction event happened at Helsinki faster than signals can travel between the two. On Monday, April 20, 2015, Bruce Kel

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

Oh i see the issue. I didn't realize you'd assume the scanner is immobile. Immobilizing it relative to everything in the universe is uhhh... rather difficult. On Monday, April 20, 2015, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rela

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

ont portruding. On Monday, April 20, 2015, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> > Huh? The scan was destructive according to your account! >> >> That does not preclude me from having a closest continuer. CCT says that >> teletransportation perserves identity.

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

llows branching. On Monday, April 20, 2015, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> Do you have a coherent, non arbitrary theory of personal identity that >> claims 1) Teletransportation creates a new person, killing the original >> > > It is a possible theory.

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

except some in your teeth are replaced throughout the course of a year. On Monday, April 20, 2015, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 20 Apr 2015, at 09:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> >> Dennis Ochei wrote: >>> >>>> One must revise the eve

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

t you don't know what you're talking about On Monday, April 20, 2015, Bruce Kellett wrote: > Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> No, it's actually completely indeterminant whether I am the closest >> continuer or not. There might be a six year old somewhere who is more >>

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

No, it's actually completely indeterminant whether I am the closest continuer or not. There might be a six year old somewhere who is more psychologically like my 5 year old self than I am and with a higher fraction of the molecules I was made of when I was 5. Or suppose I get into a matter scan

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

I think his problem is that you are using an "impoverished" definition of personal identity, the same way an incompatibilist would be annoyed at the compatibilist redefinition of free will. I have to admit that as an incompatibilist i am annoyed by this move, but in your case i am not bothered

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

Closest continuer theory is itself a redefinition of the lay conception and is frankly absurd. Semiconservative replication doesn't kill me. And the lay understanding considers teletransportation as equivalent to death, contra closest continuer theory. Combustion is the everyday concept and phl

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

Closest continuer theory is itself a redefinition of the lay conception and is frankly absurd. Semiconservative replication doesn't kill me. And the lay understanding considers teletransportation as equivalent to death, contra closest continuer theory. -- You received this message because you

Re: Mathematical Self-Reproduction

Your accent is pleasant. Is there going to be more? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to t

Re: Step 3 - one step beyond?

One must revise the everyday concept of personal identity because it isn't even coherent. It's like youre getting mad at him for explaining combustion without reference to phlogiston. He can't use the everyday notion because it is a convenient fiction. -- You received this message because you

Solomonoff Induction

Are there any practical implementations of Solomonoff Induction on a hypothesis space of bounded length programs? Like with actual code? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

I'm gathering that dovetailing means alternating through the programs, essentially multithreading, so that the UD doesn't get stuck on an unhalting computation. On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > Bruno, I get everything until you bring in the UD and then I only

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

ach execution What does it mean to dovetail on each execution? On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > For anyone who hasn't yet enjoyed the Cyberiad > > > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> > This is so true that if you push the re

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

he 2^n persons obtained when the duplication experiment is repeated n times. Don't get this either, but I haven't finished the paper, so maybe that will illuminate things On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 16 May 2014, at 06:41, Dennis Ochei wrote:

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

And <> ? On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > What are these boxes [] supposed to mean? > > > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> On 16 May 2014, at 05:23, meekerdb wrote: >> >> On 5/15/2014 5:10

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

roups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/gro

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

Reading paper now, im clear on comp On Friday, May 16, 2014, Dennis Ochei wrote: > I'd be very grateful if you could elaborate. What precisely is comp? That > the universe is computable? I take physicalism pretty seriously, but of > course it could be wrong or incomplete, but i t

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

> On 16 May 2014, at 02:13, LizR wrote: > > On 16 May 2014 10:36, Dennis Ochei > > > wrote: > >> Right Liz, the question is, does the memory link actually signify the >> presence of the same local I? Or does each moment have its own I? Or do all >> moments e

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

The more I think about the subjective expectation question the more meaningless it becomes. I'm not asking if a future person is physically or psychologically like me, I know the answer to that. In fact, even if I knew every physical fact about a body and had a complete knowledge of the neural corr

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

I meant borne. Subjective expectation is the problem. It's not clear that you can "partially" partake in an experience. An experience is either yours or it is someone elses. On Thursday, May 15, 2014, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/15/2014 12:57 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > Mo

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

Right Liz, the question is, does the memory link actually signify the presence of the same local I? Or does each moment have its own I? Or do all moments everywhere share a single global I? If there are local I's, then how are their boundaries drawn? All of these questions are epiphenomenal from t

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

But someone can have global amnesia and still be a person, I dont think having memories originating from two people makes you a non-person On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Russell Standish wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:40:10PM -0500, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > The empty view doesn't

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

2014, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/15/2014 9:27 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > >> The memory criterion is a problem because the identity question cannot be >> graded. I will either wake up in my bed tomorrow or someone else will who >> is merely like me will. >> > > Why "

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

/15/2014 9:13 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > Its pretty obvious that the naive notion cannot handle the split brain > thought experiment or ship of theseus. > > > But you don't know that those are possible. > > Its also not obvious that a duplicate would be a new person. &

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

reason to doubt that there > is or could be a "global self" but if it exists, it has its own persistent > organization and its own experience of reality. > > Terren > > > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > Parfit denies the existence of per

Open Individualism and Self Interest

On 15 May 2014, at 06:51, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > But then the identity relationship is no longer transitive... > > > Ypou mention Parfit, which put the identity on the person series, and that > makes it non transitive. Take the step 3 of the UDA, in the paper I refer > you to

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

see the seams. On Thursday, May 15, 2014, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/14/2014 11:32 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > I'm deeply conflicted. On one had I want the illusion but i also want to > act in accordance with the truth. > > > Ah, there's your problem. "Th

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

It doesn't handle the semiconservative replication case, where each resultant person retains half the material from the original, and you run into ship of theseus and sorites paradoxes On Thursday, May 15, 2014, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/14/2014 9:51 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > >

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

nance On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On 15 May 2014 13:43, Dennis Ochei > > > wrote: > >> You can still care if you die normally but something like the swampman >> thought experiment is just as good as ordinary survival under Parf

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

mble > everything idea is true. > > Cheers > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:56:18AM -0500, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > In this scenario you dont experience all possible experiences, only the > > experiences that actually arise during the course of history > > > > On

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

In this scenario you dont experience all possible experiences, only the experiences that actually arise during the course of history On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Russell Standish wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:05:15PM -0700, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > > > > > Unde

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

Also would you bite the bullet that if i where to erase your personal memories then torture your body it wouldnt count as torturing you? On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, Dennis Ochei wrote: > But then the identity relationship is no longer transitive... > > Suppose a brave officer to

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

: > On 15 May 2014 15:43, Dennis Ochei > > > wrote: > >> You can still care if you die normally but something like the swampman >> thought experiment is just as good as ordinary survival under Parfit's >> view, which a reductionist I feel is forced to accept.

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

re in any sense the same consciousness that you remember being On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On 15 May 2014 04:33, Dennis Ochei > > > wrote: > >> But that's exactly the point. Consciousness, if construed as the >> cont

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

I figured PA was either Peano or Presburger Arithmetic. I'm used to seeing ZFC but not ZF by itself. The other three are total mysteries to me On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, LizR wrote: > On 15 May 2014 14:26, Dennis Ochei > > > wrote: > >> G*, G, arithmetical hypos

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

G*, G, arithmetical hypostases, PA, ZF? I must not know the lingo round here On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 14 May 2014, at 06:05, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > Under Daniel Kolak's open > individualism<http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_individual

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

ather not accept it. Rocks and hard places... On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, meekerdb wrote: > On 5/14/2014 11:03 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, Dennis Ochei > > > wrote: > >> Under Daniel Kolak's open >> individualism&

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

ay 14, 2014, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, Dennis Ochei > > > wrote: > >> Under Daniel Kolak's open >> individualism<http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_individualism> there >> exists one numerically distinct person who

Re: Open Individualism and Self Interest

Whoops, thanks for the correction On Wednesday, May 14, 2014 12:10:36 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 5/13/2014 9:39 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > I think you'll enjoy what I uploaded. I definitely had a "Hey! I thought > of that" moment when I read it. > >

Open Individualism and Self Interest

Under Daniel Kolak's open individualism there exists one numerically distinct person who is everyone at all times. What I want to explore is the implications of this theory for a self interested individual. For those unfamiliar with Open Indi

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

Craig, I've been trying to stay focused studying the past few days (medical exam D: ), but now im procrastinating So which of the following are you advancing No implementation of rules could ever perfectly exemplify (or at least to such a degree that no human could every tell it was a mere im

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

ber 4, 2013, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Wednesday, September 4, 2013 2:45:30 PM UTC-4, Dennis Ochei wrote: >> >> Rules don't produce anything, just as triangles or steps don't produce >>> anything >> >> >> What about something like Conway's

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

ractical implications? On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Wednesday, September 4, 2013 1:46:14 PM UTC-4, Dennis Ochei wrote: >> >> Determinism is a logical justification of cause and effect or else it is >>> meaningless... >> >&g

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

x27;t claim that that you thought there were no rules period. On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Tuesday, September 3, 2013 11:36:29 PM UTC-4, Dennis Ochei wrote: >> >> 1) rationality (logic) in this case is to mean founded on justified >>

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

also, unless we come up with a clever way of raising the cost of reneging, we wont be able to make any bets On Tuesday, September 3, 2013, Dennis Ochei wrote: > 1) rationality (logic) in this case is to mean founded on justified > principles. This is inherently a normative judgmen

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

re there can be no such rules." that's fine i suppose, but I'm unable to pretend that your blindness is some sort of insight. i just think you havent looked hard enough On Tuesday, September 3, 2013, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Tuesday, September 3, 2013 8:57:13 PM

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

though this logically leads to like dissolving like. Whatever axioms there are in this universe, they are not logically justified. On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Tuesday, September 3, 2013 3:42:53 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: >> >> On 9/3/2013 12:32 PM,

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

cal. Turns out Hume beat me to this insight by quite a bit, but I suppose he had a head start, =p It seems that if we were completely logical, we would simply cease to function On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > What specifically do you claim that I am ignorant abo

Re: When will a computer pass the Turing Test?

> > >>Of course it didn't. In order to avoid the impression of "free will" > evolution would have had to provide us with conscious perception of the > working of our brain. This would not only have been expensive in > biological resources and totally unnecessary to our survival, > > I want to add

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

velop new ones. It is an explanation of how drives can exist in a deterministic system. I've already offered an explanation of qualia in a deterministic system. On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > On Monday, September 2, 2013 11:50:34 PM UTC-4, Dennis Ochei wr

Re: Determinism - Tricks of the Trade

ad, this constitutes just another form of acting in accordance to one's wants On Tuesday, September 3, 2013, Telmo Menezes wrote: > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:41 AM, meekerdb > > wrote: > > On 9/2/2013 8:50 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > > > > > No matter how comple

Re: Question for the QM experts here: quantum uncertainty of the past

Given that we are elements that might belong to multiple sequences, there is no fact of the matter as to which sequence we belong to. On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > Yes, exactly. > > > But then there are no "experiencers"... > > I prefer

Re: Question for the QM experts here: quantum uncertainty of the past

property and which may share elements with other sequences. > > Brent > > > On 9/2/2013 8:55 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote: > > "Qualitatively identical experiencers are also numerically identical" is > how i sum this position up > > On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 4:39:27

Re: God's God

I liked it until they were on earth. The human's dialogue is too preachy and cheesy, the preceding parts of the cartoon were fun and more subtle i suppose. I would have probably ended it after God 2 died On Friday, August 23, 2013 10:19:37 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > http://www.youtube.com/w

  1   2   >