Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Then if it is not a complete description, why do you call it "self-reference" ? You should just call it: "a table of parameters". The true self-reference is complete: it is included in itself in its entirety. And is doing this without getting into infinite regress. The reason it can avoid

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

It is a precise definition in the sense that if I see red, then I see red. You cannot come and tell me: "Well... maybe it wasn't red, maybe it was yellow.". No! It was red! And if you then say: "Oh, but also the robot sees red, because...", then you enter a realm of fantasy that has nothing to

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

It's still not clear to me what your concept of "machine" is. Is it just an abstract theory or is it some actually existing entity ? If it is actually existing, is it made out of atoms ? Because if it is made out of atoms, where does its free will come from ? In the case of humans free will

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

1) The qualia of black-and-white is not on the same level with the qualia of colors. The qualia of colors include the qualia of black-and-white. You cannot see a color if that color is not emergent upon black-and-white (or more specifically shades-of-gray). You cannot experience music if music

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/18/2019 4:24 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:34:26AM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: On 4/18/2019 2:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For instance, without an observer to interpret a certain pile of atoms as a machine, it

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 03:17:59AM -0700, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: > What does "self model" even mean ? Notice that any material attempt to > implement "self model" leads to infinite regress. Because let's say that a > machine has the parts A B C. To have a "self model" would

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:34:26AM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: > > > On 4/18/2019 2:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > For > instance, without an observer to interpret a certain pile of atoms as > a machine, it is just a pile of atoms. > > Are you

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/18/2019 3:52 AM, smitra wrote: On 18-04-2019 03:29, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:22:35PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: But how complete must the self-model be. That is the 64 million dollar question. As Bruno has pointed out, it can't be

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/18/2019 3:34 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: The only downside being that... the robot does not exist. People are tricking themselves too easily into personifying objects. There is no robot there, there are just a bunch of atoms I thought you didn't believe in atoms.  I

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/18/2019 3:17 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: What does "self model" even mean ? Notice that any material attempt to implement "self model" leads to infinite regress. No.  A "model" is not a complete description, it's a representation of some specific aspects.  Your

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

I see you are of the scholastic school of philosophers (I thought they were all dead) who suppose that they can make things true by giving them "precise definitions" in words.  You should study some science and learn the importance of operational definitions in connecting words to facts.

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/18/2019 2:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: For instance, without an observer to interpret a certain pile of atoms as a machine, it is just a pile of atoms. Are you saying that Mars Rover cannot interpret some of its data on Mars, when nobody observed it, or are you saying that Mars Rover has

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 18 Apr 2019, at 14:33, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > There are > > I: Information > E: Experience > M: Matter > > Some think selfhood can be made of pure-I; others think pure-E. > > Most modern materialists think I-type M is enough. > But experiential materialists think it's

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 18 Apr 2019, at 12:28, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 4:33:48 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 18 Apr 2019, at 09:11, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 8:29:25 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17,

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 18 Apr 2019, at 12:05, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List > wrote: > > Before going deeper into analyzing your claims, I would like to know if your > concept of machine has free will. Because this is a very important concept > for consciousness. If you machine doesn't have free will,

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 3:22:18 PM UTC+2, telmo wrote: > > Hi Cosmin, > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 08:42, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: > > 1) Oh, I'm clearly not making that mistake. When I talk about emergence, I > talk about ontological emergence, not the hand-waving

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 18:45, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 17 Apr 2019, at 08:08, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 05:03, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 4/16/2019 6:10 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Hi Cosmin, On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 08:42, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: > 1) Oh, I'm clearly not making that mistake. When I talk about emergence, I > talk about ontological emergence, not the hand-waving epistemic kind that > people usually talk about. The emergence that I'm

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

There are I: Information E: Experience M: Matter Some think selfhood can be made of pure-I; others think pure-E. Most modern materialists think I-type M is enough. But experiential materialists think it's (E+I)-type M. The ancient materialist Epicurus thought there were physical (I) and

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 18-04-2019 03:29, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:22:35PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: But how complete must the self-model be.  That is the 64 million dollar question. As Bruno has pointed out, it can't be complete.  Current Mars Rovers have some

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

The only downside being that... the robot does not exist. People are tricking themselves too easily into personifying objects. There is no robot there, there are just a bunch of atoms that bang into each others. You can move those atoms around all day long as you want. You will not create

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 4:33:48 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 18 Apr 2019, at 09:11, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 8:29:25 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:22:35PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything >> List

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

What does "self model" even mean ? Notice that any material attempt to implement "self model" leads to infinite regress. Because let's say that a machine has the parts A B C. To have a "self model" would mean to have another part (A B C) which would contain the "self model". But this would be

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Before going deeper into analyzing your claims, I would like to know if your concept of machine has free will. Because this is a very important concept for consciousness. If you machine doesn't have free will, then you are not talking about consciousness. On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 19:08:40

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

I'm not the only consciousness. There are other consciousnesses as well. But that's all that exists: consciousnesses and their interactions. Everything else are external appearances of the internal interactions that take place between consciousnesses. On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 18:47:06

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

I think that you are making the classical confusion that a lot of materialists are doing, namely to not have a proper understanding of precise philosophical concepts, such as: meaning, purpose, free will, etc., and because of this lack of understanding, you randomly apply these concepts where

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 18 Apr 2019, at 09:11, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 8:29:25 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:22:35PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > But how complete must the self-model be. > > That is the 64

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 18 Apr 2019, at 03:29, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:22:35PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: >> >> But how complete must the self-model be. > > That is the 64 million dollar question. To have consciousness, I put the bar on universality, to

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

But it has predictions. Is just that it depends what you understand by "predictions" at this point. If you understand something like predicting the masses of particles from physics, then it doesn't make such a prediction. But neither does physics. But on the other hand, it makes predictions

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 18 Apr 2019, at 03:00, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:25:19PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Rover is conscious, but still dissociated from ‘rover”. But that is just >> because it has no strong induction axiom, and no way to build approximation >> of >> models of

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 8:29:25 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:22:35PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything > List wrote: > > > > But how complete must the self-model be. > > That is the 64 million dollar question. > > > As Bruno has pointed out,

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:22:35PM -0700, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: > > But how complete must the self-model be.  That is the 64 million dollar question. > As Bruno has pointed out, it can't > be complete.  Current Mars Rovers have some "house keeping"self-knowledge, > like

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/17/2019 6:00 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:25:19PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: Rover is conscious, but still dissociated from ‘rover”. But that is just because it has no strong induction axiom, and no way to build approximation of models of itself. It lack a

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:25:19PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Rover is conscious, but still dissociated from ‘rover”. But that is just > because it has no strong induction axiom, and no way to build approximation of > models of itself. It lack a re-entring neural system rich enough to manage

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 11:08 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 05:03, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: On 4/16/2019 6:10 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 03:44, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: You seem to make self-reference into something

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 11:11:31 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > On 17 Apr 2019, at 01:29, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote: > > > > > > > > On 4/16/2019 6:42 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: > >> In the experientialist (Strawson-Goff-etc.

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 17 Apr 2019, at 08:18, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List > wrote: > > It's actually the other way around: biology is realized by certain processes > happening in consciousness. Biology is just an external appearance of > internal processes happening in consciousness. I totally agree.

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 17 Apr 2019, at 08:08, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 05:03, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: >> >> >> On 4/16/2019 6:10 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 03:44, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: You seem to

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 16 Apr 2019, at 18:56, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 18:42, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: >> Because Rover is just a bunch of atoms. Is nothing more than the sum of >> atoms. But in the case of self-reference/emergence, each new level is more >> than

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 16 Apr 2019, at 15:10, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 03:44, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: >> You seem to make self-reference into something esoteric. Every Mars Rover >> knows where it is, the state of its batteries, its instruments, its >>

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 17 Apr 2019, at 01:29, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > On 4/16/2019 6:42 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: >> In the experientialist (Strawson-Goff-etc. "panpsychist" view): experiential >> qualia (EQ) exist in matter at some level on their own -- and EQ cannot be >>

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 16 Apr 2019, at 18:04, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List > wrote: > > 1) What does "third-person" self-reference mean ? It is when a program/machine/number invokes itself, in any third person way. When you say that you have a problem to a tooth, that is third person self-reference,

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 11:55 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: 1) They are just ideas. Like the idea of "planet Vulcan" that disappeared when the set of ideas that gave birth to it have been replaced with other set of ideas. In the future, the idea of "dark matter" will also disappear

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 11:23 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: 1) Well... It might be a very specific arrangement of atoms, but they are still governed by Newton's Laws. Is not like if you put them in certain order magic happens and new things start to appear. It  has no memory, no purpose

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Yes, I understand your ToE is like ideal monism.  But it is one thing to assert it.  It is another to derive some predictions from it. Brent On 4/16/2019 11:18 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: It's actually the other way around: biology is realized by certain processes happening

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 1:42:14 AM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote: > > 1) Oh, I'm clearly not making that mistake. When I talk about emergence, I > talk about ontological emergence, not the hand-waving epistemic kind that > people usually talk about. The emergence that I'm talking about is

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Also putting you some blind glasses will make your visual qualia go away. This doesn't mean that the glasses are what generates qualia. On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 06:13:21 UTC+3, Brent wrote: > > > We know enough about matter that adding a little alcohol to your > bloodstream or a small blow

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

1) Rover doesn't know anything, since knowing is a property of consciousness. Rover doesn't have a model of the world, since having a model of the world means being aware of a world, and awareness is a property of consciousness. What does "Rover is represented by itself" even mean ? I think

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

1) They are just ideas. Like the idea of "planet Vulcan" that disappeared when the set of ideas that gave birth to it have been replaced with other set of ideas. In the future, the idea of "dark matter" will also disappear when the set of ideas "General Relativity" will be replaced by other set

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

1) Oh, I'm clearly not making that mistake. When I talk about emergence, I talk about ontological emergence, not the hand-waving epistemic kind that people usually talk about. The emergence that I'm talking about is the emergence of new qualia on top of previously existing qualia. This is what

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

1) Well... It might be a very specific arrangement of atoms, but they are still governed by Newton's Laws. Is not like if you put them in certain order magic happens and new things start to appear. It has no memory, no purpose and no ability to act, since memory, purpose and ability to act are

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

It's actually the other way around: biology is realized by certain processes happening in consciousness. Biology is just an external appearance of internal processes happening in consciousness. On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 02:29:24 UTC+3, Brent wrote: > > > What makes them "biological"? Do they

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 05:03, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: > > > On 4/16/2019 6:10 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 03:44, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: >>> You seem to make self-reference into something esoteric. Every Mars Rover >>>

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 5:59 PM, Philip Thrift wrote: On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 6:29:24 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 4/16/2019 6:42 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: > In the experientialist (Strawson-Goff-etc. "panpsychist" view): > experiential qualia (EQ) exist in matter at some level on

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 6:10 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 03:44, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: You seem to make self-reference into something esoteric. Every Mars Rover knows where it is, the state of its batteries, its instruments, its communications link, what time

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 6:29:24 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > > On 4/16/2019 6:42 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > In the experientialist (Strawson-Goff-etc. "panpsychist" view): > > experiential qualia (EQ) exist in matter at some level on their own -- > > and EQ cannot be reduced to

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 12:43 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: There are no electrons and no neurons. "Electrons" and "neurons" are just ideas in consciousness, are projections in the idea of "physical world" of processes that happen in consciousness. I agree they are ideas of

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 03:44, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List wrote: > You seem to make self-reference into something esoteric. Every Mars Rover > knows where it is, the state of its batteries, its instruments, its > communications link, what time it is, what its mission plan is. I don't

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 18:42, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: > Because Rover is just a bunch of atoms. Is nothing more than the sum of > atoms. But in the case of self-reference/emergence, each new level is more > than the sum of the previous levels. I disagree. My position on

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 9:42 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: Because Rover is just a bunch of atoms. Is nothing more than the sum of atoms. First, that's false.  The Rover is a very specific arrangement of atoms interacting with a specific environment.  It has memory, purpose, and the

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 6:42 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: In the experientialist (Strawson-Goff-etc. "panpsychist" view): experiential qualia (EQ) exist in matter at some level on their own -- and EQ cannot be reduced to information (numbers). So real "selfness" cannot be achieved in any "Gödel-Löb-etc."

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

There are no electrons and no neurons. "Electrons" and "neurons" are just ideas in consciousness, are projections in the idea of "physical world" of processes that happen in consciousness. And since in places where there is consciousness, consciousness has certain effects, it is normal for

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

On 4/16/2019 1:22 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote: esoteric = "intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest." According to this definition, I'm not making self-reference esoteric. On the contrary, since I

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Because Rover is just a bunch of atoms. Is nothing more than the sum of atoms. But in the case of self-reference/emergence, each new level is more than the sum of the previous levels. I don't know how you can trick yourself so badly into believing that if you put some rocks together, the

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

This clearly I must do. And I admit that at this point I am not able to do that. But this doesn't mean that phenomenology is not a science in itself. Actually, as I see it in the future, physics would be the one derived from consciousness, not the other way around. On Tuesday, 16 April 2019

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

1) What does "third-person" self-reference mean ? To me, this would be equivalent to "third-person color red", which clearly is not the case for red to be third-person, since red only exists in an ontological subjective manner. 2) What "machine" ? What "self of the machine" ? "Machine" is just

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

In the experientialist (Strawson-Goff-etc. "panpsychist" view): experiential qualia (EQ) exist in matter at some level on their own -- and EQ cannot be reduced to information (numbers). So real "selfness" cannot be achieved in any "Gödel-Löb-etc." theorem prover running on the so-called

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 16 Apr 2019, at 10:28, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List > wrote: > > Yes, no need to apply. They are using the concept of self-reference in a > misleading way. The true meaning of self-reference is an entity that refers > to itself. There are several problems with the way in which

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 16 Apr 2019, at 10:22, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List > wrote: > > esoteric = "intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of > people with a specialized knowledge or interest." According to this > definition, I'm not making self-reference esoteric. On the

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 16 Apr 2019, at 00:34, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List > wrote: > > "Matter" is just an idea in consciousness. Of course, Mechanism, and the “sound” universal machine agree with you, except the “just” is a bit too much. You need to derive the physical laws from your theory for

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

> On 15 Apr 2019, at 20:28, za_wishy via Everything List > wrote: > > Hmm... the thing is that what I'm arguing for in the book is that > self-reference is unformalizable, With mechanism, third-person self-reference is formalisable, and from this we can prove that first person

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Yes, no need to apply. They are using the concept of self-reference in a misleading way. The true meaning of self-reference is an entity that refers to itself. There are several problems with the way in which they are using the concept. First problem is that "machine" is not an entity.

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

esoteric = "intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest." According to this definition, I'm not making self-reference esoteric. On the contrary, since I devote a whole book to it, the intention is to make self-reference to be

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

So, no need to apply? :) *Seeking Research Fellows in Type Theory and Machine Self-Reference* https://intelligence.org/2016/03/18/seeking-research-fellows-in-type-theory-and-machine-self-reference/ The Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI) is accepting applications for a full-time

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

"What is Mind? not matter,What is matter? Never mind!" -The Tao of Homer -Original Message- From: 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List To: Everything List Sent: Mon, Apr 15, 2019 6:34 pm Subject: Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon "Matter" is just an

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

You seem to make self-reference into something esoteric.   Every Mars Rover knows where it is, the state of its batteries, its instruments, its communications link, what time it is, what its mission plan is.    Whether it is "formalizable" or not would seem to depend on choosing the right

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

"Matter" is just an idea in consciousness. -- 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 this

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Philip Goff is the primary author of the SEP article on the general subject https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/ while he (@Philip_Goff on Twitter, links to his web site and videos there) has written on* micropsychism* (also reviewed above) *Cosmopsychism, Micropsychism

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Hmm... the thing is that what I'm arguing for in the book is that self-reference is unformalizable, so there can be no mathematics of self-reference. More than this, self-reference is not some concept in a theory, but it is us, each and everyone of us is a form of manifestation of

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Where can I find Philip Goff's ideas ? Maybe you can summarize them here so we can discuss. But to answer your question, my book deals specifically with the emergent structure of consciousness and the nature of self-reference, so it is a rather specialized book. It is not your everyday

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Hi Cosmin, > On 7 Apr 2019, at 14:11, za_wishy via Everything List > mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>, > and online_sadhu_sa...@googlegroups.com > > wrote: > > My book "I Am" has been published on amazon. It deals with my ideas about the >

Re: My book "I Am" published on amazon

Although his book isn't out yet, how do you think your approach compares to Philip Goff's: https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/1117019/galileo-s-error/9781473563353.html He has written a lot about it via @Philip_Goff. Goff is sort the "next generation" Galen Strawson:

My book "I Am" published on amazon

My book "I Am" has been published on amazon. It deals with my ideas about the emergent structure of consciousness and the nature of self-reference which gives birth to the emergent structure, which as far as I know, are new ideas, so they might prove useful in opening new paths in the attempt

<    1   2   3   4   5