On 26 Oct 2012, at 21:14, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/26/2012 5:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 25 Oct 2012, at 07:10, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering
cattle, which are pretty smart
as computers go. We m
On 10/26/2012 5:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 25 Oct 2012, at 07:10, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle, which
are
pretty smart
as computers go. We manage not to think about starving c
On 25 Oct 2012, at 19:54, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 10/25/2012 12:05 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 25 Oct 2012, at 03:59, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a
world in which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate
cellular activity with
On 25 Oct 2012, at 07:10, meekerdb wrote:
On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle,
which are pretty smart
as computers go. We manage not to think about starving children in
Africa, and they *are*
humans. And we igno
On 10/25/2012 12:05 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 25 Oct 2012, at 03:59, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world
in which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate cellular
activity without evoking the presumed associated experience.
If w
On 25 Oct 2012, at 03:59, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world
in which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate cellular
activity without evoking the presumed associated experience.
If we wanted to test a new painkiller for instan
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 2:01:44 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>
> On 10/24/2012 10:48 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:29:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>>
>> On 10/24/2012 10:19 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:10:24 AM UTC-4,
On 10/25/2012 2:01 AM, meekerdb wrote:
To me, there is no chalkboard world. It's all dusty and flat. Not
much sexy going on, except maybe for beaten erasers.
To you maybe, but what about the chalk-people's qualia.
Brent
Good question! We can ask the same question of mathematical entities!
On 10/24/2012 10:48 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:29:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 10/24/2012 10:19 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:10:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
O
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:29:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>
> On 10/24/2012 10:19 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:10:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>>
>> On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>
>> Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughte
On 10/24/2012 10:19 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:10:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle,
which are
pretty smart
as computers go. We
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:10:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>
> On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle, which
>> are pretty smart
>> as computers go. We manage not to think about starving children in
>> Africa, an
On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle, which
are pretty
smart
as computers go. We manage not to think about starving children in Africa,
and they
*are*
humans. And we ignore the looming disasters of
On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 10:54:52 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>
> On 10/24/2012 6:59 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world in
> which Comp is
> > true and it is impossible to simulate cellular activity without evoking
> the presume
On 10/24/2012 6:59 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world in which Comp is
true and it is impossible to simulate cellular activity without evoking the presumed
associated experience.
If we wanted to test a new painkiller for instance, Com
On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 10:05:40 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Craig Weinberg
> >
> wrote:
> > If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world in
> > which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate cellular activity
> > withou
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world in
> which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate cellular activity
> without evoking the presumed associated experience.
>
> If we wanted to test a new painkiller
If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world in
which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate cellular activity
without evoking the presumed associated experience.
If we wanted to test a new painkiller for instance, Comp=true means that it
is *IMPOSSIBLE* to model
18 matches
Mail list logo