On 28 February 2010 17:38, Rex Allen wrote:
>> People believe and do all sorts of crazy things, as I'm sure you know.
>> The psychological capacity for just about any possible behaviour is
>> there, but the very maladaptive behaviours are rare. It's not that
>> it's difficult to make an animal th
On 27 Feb 2010, at 18:38, David Nyman wrote:
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 M
On 28 Feb 2010, at 07:33, Rex Allen wrote:
What would the causal mechanism for natural selection be? A
"selection field"? "Selection particles"? Spooky "selection at a
distance"???
No, it is (mainly) Sex.
Selection by individual seduction. On some level.
Chatting universal chromosomes
On 28 February 2010 15:45, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> UDA shows that the wave equation (not just the collapse) has to emerge from
> a relative state measure on all computational histories.
> The schroedinger equation has to be itself the result of the abandon of the
> identity thesis.
Bruno, I'm sor
On 2/27/2010 10:33 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
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 evol
On 2/27/2010 10:38 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
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
condition
Okay, I think maybe we're getting somewhere!
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On 28 February 2010 17:38, Rex Allen wrote:
>
>>> People believe and do all sorts of crazy things, as I'm sure you know.
>>> The psychological capacity for just about any possible behaviour
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 28 Feb 2010, at 07:33, Rex Allen wrote:
>
>> What would the causal mechanism for natural selection be? A
>> "selection field"? "Selection particles"? Spooky "selection at a
>> distance"???
>
>
>
>
> No, it is (mainly) Sex.
>
> Select
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
> I think you have to narrow a concept of "explanation"; you seem to confine
> it to "causal physical chain at the most fundamental level." If someone
> asked you whether you expected a newly discovered animal species to be one
> that ate it's
9 matches
Mail list logo
