On 29 Jul 2014, at 14:50, David Nyman wrote:
On 28 July 2014 19:16, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
This makes clearer my apprehension of Hoyle's heuristic, which
might, if taken too much seriously, be on the slope of a
reductionism of something 1p to something 3p. Perhaps.
I do
So do we recognise this thing called a self or a subject or a person or a
soul or an I or a whatever as something that is TOTALLY independent of the
hosting apparatus?
Why should I put up with the ridiculous notion that my brain secretes my mind
which somehow projects my person? I don't
On 28 July 2014 22:07, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
So do we recognise this thing called a self or a subject or a person
or a soul or an I or a whatever as something that is TOTALLY
independent of the hosting apparatus?
Why should I put up with the ridiculous notion that my brain
On 28 Jul 2014, at 8:14 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 July 2014 22:07, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
So do we recognise this thing called a self or a subject or a person
or a soul or an I or a whatever as something that is TOTALLY independent
of the hosting
On 27 July 2014 16:15, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
This tacit supernumerary assumption is what may
make it seem plausible that there is no need of a knower for such a
distinction to be relevant (i.e. that realism about Deep Blue is
justified in the absence of any possible knower).
I
On 28 July 2014 11:25, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Actually, comp is terrifying.
Rest assured, it terrifies me too. I think the terror stems, in a sense,
from the persistent (and I guess, at the terrestrial level, essential)
illusion of control. The idea that I could be
On 28 Jul 2014, at 12:07, Kim Jones wrote:
So do we recognise this thing called a self or a subject or a
person or a soul or an I or a whatever as something that is
TOTALLY independent of the hosting apparatus?
I don't think so for the 3-self, which *is* the hosting apparatus. It
is the
On 28 Jul 2014, at 12:25, Kim Jones wrote:
On 28 Jul 2014, at 8:14 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 July 2014 22:07, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
So do we recognise this thing called a self or a subject or a
person or a soul or an I or a whatever as something that is
On 28 Jul 2014, at 12:14, LizR wrote:
On 28 July 2014 22:07, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
So do we recognise this thing called a self or a subject or a
person or a soul or an I or a whatever as something that is
TOTALLY independent of the hosting apparatus?
Why should I put
On 28 Jul 2014, at 13:18, David Nyman wrote:
On 27 July 2014 16:15, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
This tacit supernumerary assumption is what may
make it seem plausible that there is no need of a knower for such a
distinction to be relevant (i.e. that realism about Deep Blue is
On 28 Jul 2014, at 13:43, David Nyman wrote:
On 28 July 2014 11:25, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Actually, comp is terrifying.
Rest assured, it terrifies me too. I think the terror stems, in a
sense, from the persistent (and I guess, at the terrestrial level,
essential)
On 25 Jul 2014, at 17:37, David Nyman wrote:
On 24 July 2014 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
To put it another way, there is nobody present for whom it could
represent a difference.
It still exist, or the difference 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ... will need
itself a knower to make
On 24 July 2014 22:18, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
To put it another way, there is nobody present for whom it could
represent a difference.
It still exist, or the difference 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ... will need
itself a knower to make sense. But with comp, we don't need more
than
On 24 July 2014 22:44, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
So I think you just saying I am missing the qualia - but that's the part
that I think it is unreasonable to ask for an explanation of. In what terms
can it be explained - I'd say none. And I don't think your explanation in
terms of
On 24 Jul 2014, at 23:44, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/24/2014 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 23 Jul 2014, at 20:35, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/23/2014 10:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 18:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/22/2014 12:08 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am,
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
I don't think the ability to say I know (or believe) I am awake has
anything to do with intelligence.
If so then it MUST be a byproduct of intelligence because otherwise it
would not have evolved, and yet it did at
-Original Message-
From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, Jul 22, 2014 5:57 pm
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/22/2014 2:45 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
Ant colonies
On 23 Jul 2014, at 20:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/23/2014 9:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Intelligence is more simple. It is, I think the natural state of
the virgin universal machine.
What's a UTM with no program?
A Gift of God.
It is a universal machine virgin of any program. A computer
On 23 Jul 2014, at 20:35, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/23/2014 10:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 18:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/22/2014 12:08 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
wrote:
What part of your brain is more evolved than a
On 23 Jul 2014, at 21:59, David Nyman wrote:
On 23 July 2014 18:25, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
You miss, and perhaps David's too (?), the fact that above a
threshold of relative complexity, the lower level is not relevant
for the description of the higher level. It would be
On 7/24/2014 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 23 Jul 2014, at 20:35, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/23/2014 10:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 18:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/22/2014 12:08 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On 23 Jul 2014, at 4:33 am, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote:
To be unconscious is not merely to lose the faculties which make our quality
of life human, but to lose all faculties.
Perhaps, but I doubt that you lose your 'self'. A self is immortal. Just like
you wake up from the
On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 4:16:07 AM UTC-4, Kim Jones wrote:
On 23 Jul 2014, at 4:33 am, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com
javascript: wrote:
To be unconscious is not merely to lose the faculties which make our
quality of life human, but to lose all faculties.
Perhaps, but I
On 21 Jul 2014, at 18:55, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
OK. So what separates us then, from dolphins and elephants
Intelligence
I would have said here that what separate us from dolphins and
elephants is typically more competence,
On 22 Jul 2014, at 09:08, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
What part of your brain is more evolved than a cat's brain that
allows you to say I know?
I'm just guessing but maybe the Neocortex because it's the biggest
anatomical
On 22 Jul 2014, at 18:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/22/2014 12:08 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
What part of your brain is more evolved than a cat's brain that
allows you to say I know?
I'm just guessing but maybe the Neocortex
On 22 Jul 2014, at 20:57, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno and Kim:
what SELF would you consider in e.g. ants? if we realize the
highly merged (individualized?) group-self - the answer is different
from taking the present individual (simplified DOWN to functional
minimum composition units) 'ant'
On 7/23/2014 9:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Intelligence is more simple. It is, I think the natural state of the virgin universal
machine.
What's a UTM with no program?
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe
On 23 Jul 2014, at 07:18, Kim Jones wrote:
On 23 Jul 2014, at 4:38 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Is the following true:
Self-awareness = self-consciousness (?)
OK. Both involves the 1p. But the []p gives a notion of 3p self-
awareness, plausibly not conscious, like a
On 7/23/2014 10:25 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 18:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/22/2014 12:08 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
What part of your brain is more evolved than a cat's brain
On 23 July 2014 18:25, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
You miss, and perhaps David's too (?), the fact that above a threshold of
relative complexity, the lower level is not relevant for the description of
the higher level. It would be like asking why Obama has been elected?,
and getting
Hey, thanks for the book recommendation guys!
Kim
On 20 Jul 2014, at 11:03 pm, David Nyman da...@davidnyman.com wrote:
Have you read Julian Jaynes The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of
the Bicameral Mind?
Great book! Even if they are impossible to verify in detail, Jaynes's
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
What part of your brain is more evolved than a cat's brain that allows you
to say I know?
I'm just guessing but maybe the Neocortex because it's the biggest anatomical
difference between a cat's brain and mine. But I
On 20 Jul 2014, at 10:54 pm, Kim Jones, then Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
I don't think, along with Russell Standish, that ants are conscious, for
example - but individuals may share in a group 'self'. Selfhood is
independent of minds or of contents of minds or the precision or
On 7/22/2014 12:08 AM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 22 Jul 2014, at 2:55 am, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
What part of your brain is more evolved than a cat's brain that allows
you to say
I know?
I'm just guessing but maybe the Neocortex because
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Are you saying that there is no consciousness without intelligence?
No, I'm saying there is no intelligence without consciousness. For all I
know rocks and cadavers are conscious even though they don't behave
On Saturday, July 19, 2014 11:26:13 PM UTC-4, Kim Jones wrote:
A good thinking habit to cultivate is simplicity. Try and make it as
simple as you can.
Consciousness comes in two flavours (that I know of):
1. I know
2. I know that I know. (Presumably something to do with remembering
I will send a longer comment. here are just some precision.
On 22 Jul 2014, at 11:28, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 10:54 pm, Kim Jones, then Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be
wrote:
I don't think, along with Russell Standish, that ants are
conscious, for example - but individuals
Bruno and Kim:
what SELF would you consider in e.g. ants? if we realize the highly
merged (individualized?) *group-self* - the answer is different from taking
the present individual (simplified DOWN to functional minimum composition
units) *'ant'* and trying to assign a *'self*' to such
On 7/22/2014 11:57 AM, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno and Kim:
what SELF would you consider in e.g. ants? if we realize the highly merged
(individualized?) */group-self/* - the answer is different from taking the present
individual (simplified DOWN to functional minimum composition units) *'ant'*
--
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 group, send email to
communicate with such phenomenal minds?
-Original Message-
From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: 22-Jul-2014 16:27:08 +
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/22/2014 11:57 AM, John Mikes wrote:
Bruno and Kim:
what SELF
Ant Hillary is (at least in DRH's fable) roughly comparable to a human
brain. Clearly the level of integration is (almost certainly) looser - our
neurons don't wander around, but maintain (more or less) fixed
relationships to each other, at least on the timescale of holding a
conversation (the
On 23 Jul 2014, at 4:38 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
Is the following true:
Self-awareness = self-consciousness (?)
OK. Both involves the 1p. But the []p gives a notion of 3p self-awareness,
plausibly not conscious, like a machine which can assert simple (correct)
On 23 Jul 2014, at 9:19 am, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Ant Hillary is (at least in DRH's fable) roughly comparable to a human brain.
Clearly the level of integration is (almost certainly) looser - our neurons
don't wander around, but maintain (more or less) fixed relationships to
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
OK. So what separates us then, from dolphins and elephants
Intelligence
You aren't allowed to respond Intelligence
Sorry. Please don't call the cops.
because intelligence is what makes introspection possible in the first
Brent: I am not so sure about the langauge part. animals communicate in
more ways than we can 'understand' in humanese, we don't always even
understand what peoples communicate in humanese... (even in our own mother
tongues).
Then there is math (I heard about it when I was young). Now I am not so
-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 9:49 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014
On 20 Jul 2014, at 3:51 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
It could be that language constructs the self (or perhaps more precisely that
using language allowed us to create the concept of a self as one amongst many
linguistic concepts).
I don't grok this thing of the self 'evolving' like
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Kim Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 10:38 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 20 Jul 2014, at 3:11 pm, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 10:48 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/19/2014 10:11 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote
On 20 Jul 2014, at 5:22 pm, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Are you suggesting that language, or our superb mastery of tool-making had
little or no effect on how our own human “self” evolved?
Chris
Not on how it evolved after it
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Kim Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 11:37 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 20 Jul 2014, at 3:51 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Kim Jones
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 12:44 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 20 Jul 2014, at 5:22 pm, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
On 20 July 2014 18:37, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 3:51 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
It could be that language constructs the self (or perhaps more precisely
that using language allowed us to create the concept of a self as one
amongst many linguistic
On 20 Jul 2014, at 05:26, Kim Jones wrote:
A good thinking habit to cultivate is simplicity. Try and make it as
simple as you can.
Consciousness comes in two flavours (that I know of):
1. I know
2. I know that I know. (Presumably something to do with remembering
that you knew.)
I
On 20 Jul 2014, at 06:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Kim Jones
kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Consciousness comes in two flavours (that I know of):
1. I
On 7/19/2014 11:37 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 3:51 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
It could be that language constructs the self (or perhaps more precisely that
using language allowed us to create the concept of a self as one amongst many
linguistic concepts).
I don't grok
Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 9:49 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Kim Jones
kimjo
@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 9:49 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
On 20 Jul 2014, at 08:37, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 3:51 pm, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
It could be that language constructs the self (or perhaps more
precisely that using language allowed us to create the concept of a
self as one amongst many linguistic concepts).
I
Have you read Julian Jaynes The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown
of the Bicameral Mind?
Great book! Even if they are impossible to verify in detail, Jaynes's ideas
are a terrific stimulus to thinking about both the function and the origin
of consciousness (in the 3p sense). By the way, I
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Consciousness comes in two flavours (that I know of):
1. I know
2. I know that I know. (Presumably something to do with remembering that
you knew.)
Are there any others?
Well, do you know that you know that you
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Consciousness comes in two flavours (that I know of):
1. I know
2. I know that I know. (Presumably something to do with remembering that you
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com
mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au
mailto:kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Consciousness comes in two flavours (that I
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 9:49 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm
@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
Consciousness comes in two flavours (that I know of):
1
On 7/19/2014 10:11 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote:
*From:*everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On
Behalf Of *meekerdb
*Sent:* Saturday, July 19, 2014 9:49 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 20 July 2014 17:38, Kim Jones kimjo...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
How do language and/or opposable thumbs construct an experiencing subject?
Clearly the subject precedes the existence of these things. Where does the
self come from? What is it? A self constructs language and sees the value
of
-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *meekerdb
*Sent:* Saturday, July 19, 2014 9:49 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* Re: It Knows That It Knows
On 7/19/2014 9:25 PM, Kim Jones wrote:
On 20 Jul 2014, at 1:44 pm, John Clark johnkcl
70 matches
Mail list logo
