On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> The scientific conception of neurons is that *nothing* in them happens
>> without a physical reason, ever.
>
>
> Which is why we those scientists have no idea what consciousness is.
> Physical is a meaningless term. Whatever happens is ph
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> You persist in saying that if the components of the system are
>> mechanistic then the system cannot control something. That is not the
>> way the phrase is normally used.
>
>
> What do you mean by 'control'? Can you define it?
"Control"
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 12:26:24 AM UTC-4, Terren Suydam wrote:
>
> This has to be my last response on this for a while. I will just say,
> about consciousness arising from other premises: It is not the material
> itself that is important, but the organization of it.
>
I understand that p
Hi
This non-technical video suggests (to me) a possible QM explanation of
synchronicity and
Sheldrake's morphisms based on relational QM states and consistent QM histories
(
R. Griffiths, Gell-Mann, Hartle , Omnes, and others).
We live in an indefinite world of superposed quantum states,
wh
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 , Craig Weinberg wrote:
>If someone sells you into slavery, or brainwashes you in a cult, can you
> not see that you have lost something?
>
Yes.
> > Can you not 'control' your lungs to a greater extent than you can
> control your heartbeat?
>
Yes
> How do you define this
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> So all "free will" means is that sometimes we can make correct
> predictions about what we will do before we do it,
>
Then a Turing Machine has free will because it can correctly predict that
it will list all the factors of 128 and then sto
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 12:22:19 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 , Craig Weinberg >wrote:
>
> >If someone sells you into slavery, or brainwashes you in a cult, can you
>> not see that you have lost something?
>>
>
> Yes.
>
>
>> > Can you not 'control' your lungs to a g
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 12:41:27 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Craig Weinberg
>
> > wrote:
>
> > So all "free will" means is that sometimes we can make correct
>> predictions about what we will do before we do it,
>>
>
That's what you say, not me. I gue
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 Craig Weinberg wrote:
> What does the popularity of porn and gossip have to do with the capacity
> of computers to think and feel?
>
I have no idea, but that's one of the best Zen Koans I've ever heard.
There is no other logical conclusion to make given the FACT that
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 3:39:55 PM UTC, Roger Clough wrote:
>
> We live in an indefinite world of superposed quantum states,
>
> Doesn't it depend what you mean by 'live'? As far as I can see, I live in
a definite world, but I am aware of having an imagination and a bunch of
concepts about
tjp,
If you allow that physical consciousness resides in a materialistic
BEC in the brain, and that the matter-BEC is entangled with a mind-BEC
where realistic quantum computations (comp) are manifest, then yes
physics is consistent with physical consciousness.
Richard Ruquist
On Sat, Mar 16, 201
On 15 Mar 2013, at 20:38, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 3:04:24 PM UTC-4, Terren Suydam wrote:
No, I think that you haven't understood it,
That's because you are only working with a straw man of me. What is
it that you think that I don't understand? The legacy view is tha
On 15 Mar 2013, at 21:18, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
>> No that is the exact opposite of the truth, we cannot follow our
own self determination. If you tell me that a system is
deterministic you have added exactly zero information by telling m
On 16 Mar 2013, at 08:15, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Craig Weinberg
wrote:
You persist in saying that if the components of the system are
mechanistic then the system cannot control something. That is not
the
way the phrase is normally used.
What do yo
On 15 Mar 2013, at 22:14, Terren Suydam wrote:
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Feynman
A great quote that admonishes us to never trust our beliefs 100%.
Very few people I have met have Feynman's humility.
Wonderful (and funny) quote.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/
On 3/16/2013 10:55 AM, tjp.bay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 3:39:55 PM UTC, Roger Clough wrote:
We live in an indefinite world of superposed quantum states,
Doesn't it depend what you mean by 'live'? As far as I can see, I live in a definite
world, but I am aware of hav
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 3:15:58 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Craig Weinberg
> >
> wrote:
>
> >> You persist in saying that if the components of the system are
> >> mechanistic then the system cannot control something. That is not the
> >> way the phrase
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 1:42:29 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 Craig Weinberg >wrote:
>
> > What does the popularity of porn and gossip have to do with the
>> capacity of computers to think and feel?
>>
>
> I have no idea, but that's one of the best Zen Koans I've eve
>
> "For we must remember that the materialist philosophy (whether true or
> not) is certainly much more limiting than any religion. In one sense, of
> course, all intelligent ideas are narrow. They cannot be broader than
> themselves. A Christian is only restricted in the same sense that an
>
On 3/16/2013 3:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
"For we must remember that the materialist philosophy (whether true or not)
is
certainly much more limiting than any religion. In one sense, of course, all
intelligent ideas are narrow. They cannot be broader than themselves. A
Christian
On 3/16/2013 3:15 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 15 Mar 2013, at 20:38, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, March 15, 2013 3:04:24 PM UTC-4, Terren Suydam wrote:
>> No, I think that you haven't understood it,
>>
>> That's because you are only working with a straw man of me. What is it
>>
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> "Control" can be defined less controversially than "free will". I
>> control something if I can determine its behaviour according to my
>> wishes.
>
>
> What do you see as being the difference between free will and the ability to
> determi
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 6:41:58 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
>
> On 3/16/2013 3:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> "For we must remember that the materialist philosophy (whether true or
>> not) is certainly much more limiting than any religion. In one sense, of
>> course, all intelligent ideas
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 3:15:43 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 15 Mar 2013, at 20:38, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, March 15, 2013 3:04:24 PM UTC-4, Terren Suydam wrote:
>>
>> No, I think that you haven't understood it,
>>
>
> That's because you are only working with a st
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 8:54:35 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Craig Weinberg
> >
> wrote:
>
> >> "Control" can be defined less controversially than "free will". I
> >> control something if I can determine its behaviour according to my
> >> wishes.
> >
>
25 matches
Mail list logo
