On 20.08.2011 00:38 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/19/2011 11:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
It seems that at present there is only one candidate for a zombie -
Dennet, who defending his theory seems to refuse his own
consciousness (I do not remember now where I have seen this nice
statement,
On 8/20/2011 12:12 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 20.08.2011 00:38 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/19/2011 11:51 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
It seems that at present there is only one candidate for a zombie -
Dennet, who defending his theory seems to refuse his own
consciousness (I do not rememb
On Aug 19, 10:26 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/19/2011 6:22 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > The retina doesn't act on the world in response to light? It doesn't
> > send a signal to the brain in the same manner that changes in a metal
> > strip triggers the HVAC system?
>
> The hypothesis was that the
Trying to remember where I have seen the statement about Dennett, I have
made search on Google.
Two findings (both are not my source though):
1) Is Daniel Dennett a zombie?
Discussion on ephilosopher.com where the question, I believe is close to
the statement that I have seen.
"This is not
On Aug 20, 8:02 am, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
>Now, Dennett would be the
> first to say that it just 'seems' to me that I have a phenomenology but
> that is the point isn't it? If it seems to me then I have it. How can
> anyone think otherwise??
Exactly. The fact that we feel is not contingent upon
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14574747
Looks like we may be finding out sooner rather than later whether
there is more to the psyche than networking logic.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send em
On 19 Aug 2011, at 18:49, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 18 Aug 2011, at 20:13, benjayk wrote:
It depends on what we mean with primitive ontological entity.
What we assume to exist (or to make sense) explicitly when we
build a
theory.
You could define this as primitive ontol
On 19 Aug 2011, at 20:18, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 18.08.2011 16:24 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 17 Aug 2011, at 20:07, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/17/2011 10:36 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 16.08.2011 20:47 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/16/2011 11:03 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Yes,
On 20 Aug 2011, at 04:24, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/19/2011 6:14 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> Perhaps later. See a bit below. Bp is meant for "the machine
believes
> p" when written in the language of the machine. If the machine
is a
> theorem prover for arithmetic, Bp is an abbreviation for
On 8/20/2011 4:04 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 19, 10:26 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/19/2011 6:22 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
The retina doesn't act on the world in response to light? It doesn't
send a signal to the brain in the same manner that changes in a metal
strip triggers t
Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 19 Aug 2011, at 18:49, benjayk wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18 Aug 2011, at 20:13, benjayk wrote:
>>>
>>>
>
It depends on what we mean with primitive ontological entity.
>>>
>>> What we assume to exist (or to make
PART I
On Aug 20, 12:16 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2011, at 03:14, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > On Aug 18, 9:43 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> >> On 17 Aug 2011, at 06:47, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> >>> Not sure I understand. Do I hope for this world and therefore it
> >>> exists to me in a
On Aug 20, 3:05 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/20/2011 4:04 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> No they don't. The thermostat that's connected to the furnace can
> modify it's world, who's only attribute is temperature. If it's not
> connected to a furnace then it can sense temperature, but it can't act
On 8/20/2011 6:10 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 20, 8:02 am, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Now, Dennett would be the
first to say that it just 'seems' to me that I have a phenomenology but
that is the point isn't it? If it seems to me then I have it. How can
anyone think otherwise??
Exac
Craig,
you know more about the 'IBM-Synapse' achievement than myself (easy: I know
nothing, did not even thopughtfully decipher the article in all its
details).
I would ask IBM (they may not reply of course) if their machine (chip?) can
solve ANY technical problem barred by unsurmountable difficult
I have browsed papers on Loebian embodiment, for example
Life, Mind, and Robots
The Ins and Outs of Embodied Cognition
Hybrid Neural Systems, 2000 - Springer
http://acs.ist.psu.edu/misc/dirk-files/Papers/EmbodiedCognition/Life,%20Mind%20and%20Robots_The%20Ins%20and%20Outs%20of%20Embodied%20Cognit
16 matches
Mail list logo
