On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 01:03:04PM +1100, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
I don't mean the white rabbits from the Turing machine, I mean the ones
outside it. If we accept that an abstract machine can just exist, without
benefit of a separate physical reality, why not also accept that
On 3/19/07, Russell Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 01:03:04PM +1100, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
I don't mean the white rabbits from the Turing machine, I mean the ones
outside it. If we accept that an abstract machine can just exist,
without
benefit of a
Jason,
do you really consider YOUR (= ours, as of humans of today) capability of any
'ordering' - according to what WE find orderable - the ONLY possible 'ordering'
that be?
To include the word 'disorder' makes no difference.
Noise? anything not fitting into what we can compute to fit into our
Stathis:
it seems you apply some hard 'Occami\sation' to consckiousness: as I see you
consider it as 'being conscious - vs. unconscious'. The physiological
(mediacal?) way.
In my experience from reading and intenrnet-discussing Ccness for over 15 years
- most researchers consider it more than
On 3/20/07, John M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stathis:
it seems you apply some hard 'Occami\sation' to consckiousness: as I see
you consider it as 'being conscious - vs. unconscious'. The physiological
(mediacal?) way.
In my experience from reading and intenrnet-discussing Ccness for over 15
5 matches
Mail list logo