On 27 February 2010 14:59, Rex Allen wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou
> wrote:
>> On 26 February 2010 16:41, Rex Allen wrote:
>>> Could our universe *actually* produce such a being by applying our
>>> presumably deterministic laws to any set of initial conditions ov
On 8 Feb, 14:12, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> The main problem with Tegmark is that he assumes an implicit identity
> thesis mind/observer-state which does not work once we assume the
> computationalist hypothesis, (and thus cannot work with Everett
> Quantum Mechanics either). The weakness of such app
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On 27 February 2010 14:59, Rex Allen wrote:
>> People can only have beliefs that supervene onto one of the physical
>> configurations that it is possible for a human brain to take. What
>> determines the set of possible physical brain
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 25, 2010, at 1:56 AM, Charles
> wrote:
>
> On Feb 23, 8:42 pm, Brent Meeker wrote:
>>
>>> I think
>>> it's an example of the radiation arrow of time making a time-reversed
>>> process impossible - or maybe just vanishingly impro
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 27 February 2010 14:59, Rex Allen wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 26 February 2010 16:41, Rex Allen wrote:
Could our universe *actually* produce such a being by applying our
presumably deterministic laws to a
Rex Allen wrote:
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 27 February 2010 14:59, Rex Allen wrote:
People can only have beliefs that supervene onto one of the physical
configurations that it is possible for a human brain to take. What
determines the set of possi
On 28 February 2010 05:33, Rex Allen wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you're saying here. Is it that peoples' beliefs
>> could not be other than what they actually are given initial
>> conditions and physical laws? I suppose that is true, but even in a
>> deterministic single universe we generally us
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
>> Rex Allen wrote:
>>
>> Note that I am not arguing that this particular belief is an
>> impossible belief. What I'm arguing is that evolution doesn't help
>> you one way or the other in deciding...because evolution is just a
>> mental tool, a
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Stathis Papaioannou
wrote:
> On 28 February 2010 05:33, Rex Allen wrote:
>
>>> I'm not sure what you're saying here. Is it that peoples' beliefs
>>> could not be other than what they actually are given initial
>>> conditions and physical laws? I suppose that is
9 matches
Mail list logo
