Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Rex Allen
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > On 24 Jun 2011, at 17:49, Rex Allen wrote: >> >> Awareness and self-awareness aren't related to the question of >> consciousness.  They fall well within the realm of the easy problems. > > I have deduced this from some posts. You, and Dennett

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread meekerdb
On 6/26/2011 12:58 PM, Rex Allen wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Jun 2011, at 17:49, Rex Allen wrote: Awareness and self-awareness aren't related to the question of consciousness. They fall well within the realm of the easy problems. I hav

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Rex Allen
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 4:33 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/26/2011 12:58 PM, Rex Allen wrote: >> Possible, but unlikely.  The practical benefits of more accurate and >> useful theories should be more than sufficient to keep people >> motivated. >> > > The idea that our theories are approaching some m

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread John Mikes
Russell: "...Life-like phenomena" implies something 'life-like'. So: LIKE WHAT are those phenomena? I would not turn to my other side in peace that biologists are negligent. I ask them: what do you have in mind when you SAY: l i f e ? (their base line: the 'bio') It is more than just biochem ch

RE: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Colin Geoffrey Hales
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rex Allen Sent: Monday, 27 June 2011 5:59 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Bruno

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread meekerdb
On 6/26/2011 2:37 PM, Rex Allen wrote: We can never be sure it's real (and in > general it may incoherent patches), but on the other hand we can't be sure > any particular part of it is not real. Right, but asserting that the theories are true of the world doesn't add anything to their u

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Russell Standish
John - I think you misread the recent exchange between Brent and myself. Brent was asserting that the question "What is life" is somehow obsolete - not resolved per se, but no longer interesting. I was asserting the opposite - that it is indeed still open. As for life-like - it is a weasel word. I

The Brain on Trial

2011-06-26 Thread Rex Allen
So what does compatibilism have to say about this? Nothing useful, it seems to me... http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/07/the-brain-on-trial/8520/ Advances in brain science are calling into question the volition behind many criminal acts. A leading neuroscientist describes how th

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Rex Allen
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote: > Can I recalibrate this a little so that you can scientifically handle > consciousness? > > 1) science is based on observation. > > 2) scientific 'observation' is 100% implemented by the consciousness of > scientists. > > 3) regularity

RE: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Colin Geoffrey Hales
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rex Allen Sent: Monday, 27 June 2011 12:34 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Colin Geo

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Rex Allen
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 8:49 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 6/26/2011 2:37 PM, Rex Allen wrote: >>> >>> We can never be sure it's real (and in >>> > general it may incoherent patches), but on the other hand we can't be >>> > sure >>> > any particular part of it is not real. >>> >> >> Right, but assert

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Rex Allen
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Colin Geoffrey Hales < cgha...@unimelb.edu.au> wrote: > > There are empirical predictions made by T' that cannot be made by T and > these are entirely confined to the implementation of an observer. > > What's an example of this? Rex -- You received this message

Re: The Brain on Trial

2011-06-26 Thread meekerdb
On 6/26/2011 7:23 PM, Rex Allen wrote: So what does compatibilism have to say about this? Nothing useful, it seems to me... http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/07/the-brain-on-trial/8520/ Advances in brain science are calling into question the volition behind many criminal ac

RE: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread Colin Geoffrey Hales
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rex Allen Sent: Monday, 27 June 2011 1:58 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Colin Geoffrey Hales wr

Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

2011-06-26 Thread meekerdb
On 6/26/2011 8:54 PM, Rex Allen wrote: On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 8:49 PM, meekerdb > wrote: > On 6/26/2011 2:37 PM, Rex Allen wrote: >>> >>> We can never be sure it's real (and in >>> > general it may incoherent patches), but on the other hand we can't be >>> > sur