On 10 Sep, 14:56, David Nyman wrote:
> 2009/9/9 Flammarion :
>
> >> What you say above seems pretty much in sympathy with the reductio
> >> arguments based on arbitrariness of implementation.
>
> > It is strictly an argument against the claim that
> > computation causes consciousness , as oppos
On 10 Sep, 23:09, David Nyman wrote:
> 2009/9/10 Brent Meeker :
>
> > But isn't that because the "computational" in CTM is abstracted away
> > from a context in which there is action and purpose. It's the same
> > problem that leads to the question, "Does a rock compute every
> > function?" W
Brent,
I guess you know my reply to this, but I want to make it clear, for
the benefit of the general discussion. I add a point though.
On 10 Sep 2009, at 21:27, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> But isn't that because the "computational" in CTM is abstracted away
> from a context in which there is acti
On 4 Sep, 22:12, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 04 Sep 2009, at 19:21, Flammarion wrote:
>
> > ... Bruno has been arguign that numbers
> > exist because there are true mathematical statements asserting their
> > existence. The counterargument is that "existence" in mathematical
> > statements is me
On 11 Sep 2009, at 17:45, Flammarion wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4 Sep, 22:12, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> On 04 Sep 2009, at 19:21, Flammarion wrote:
>>
>>> ... Bruno has been arguign that numbers
>>> exist because there are true mathematical statements asserting their
>>> existence. The counterargument is
5 matches
Mail list logo
