Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Pierz
On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 3:15:01 PM UTC+10, Brent wrote: On 10/1/2013 9:56 PM, Pierz wrote: Yes, I understand that to be Chalmer's main point. Although, if the qualia can be different, it does present issues - how much and in what way can it vary? Yes, that's a question that

Re: The canal effect

2013-10-02 Thread Alberto G. Corona
2013/9/30 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 9/30/2013 2:02 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Let me give an example: Free will. That we can choose between alternative actions (and we can predict the consequences for the good or evil of ourselves and others) has been ever considered a fact.

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread Russell Standish
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 05:25:32AM +, chris peck wrote: Hi Russell Not at all. The UDA does not depend on the MWI at all. And I didn't suggest it did. This is exquisite chaos. Assuming none of us are correct then we're rebutting rebuttles we misrepresent of arguments that have been

Re: The canal effect

2013-10-02 Thread Alberto G. Corona
I forgot to answer the last one: 2013/9/30 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 9/30/2013 2:02 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Let me give an example: Free will. That we can choose between alternative actions (and we can predict the consequences for the good or evil of ourselves and others) has

Re: The canal effect

2013-10-02 Thread Alberto G. Corona
2013/10/1 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 30 Sep 2013, at 15:56, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Not exactly. And that depends on what we call as science. Many called sciences are pure rubbish, while some other disciplines outside of what is now called science are much more interesting. I´, in

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Russell Standish
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 10:09:03AM -0700, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note also that the expression computation have qualia can be misleading. A computation has no qualia, strictly speaking. Only a person supported by an infinity of computation can be said to

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Oct 2013, at 18:41, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Digital teleportation is not necessary, with existing technology I can make a real experiment, not just a thought experiment, that incorporates all the philosophical

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Oct 2013, at 18:46, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 1, 2013 7:13:17 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Sep 2013, at 14:05, Telmo Menezes wrote to Craig: The comp assumption that computations have qualia hidden inside them is not much of an answer either in my view.

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:09, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note also that the expression computation have qualia can be misleading. A computation has no qualia, strictly speaking. Only a person supported by an infinity of computation can be said to have qualia,

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:19, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 5:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: CA are local. The universe cannot be a CA if comp is correct, and the empirical violation of Bell's inequality confirms this comp feature. ?? But CA are Turing universal, which means they can compute

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:34, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 7:13 AM, David Nyman wrote: However, on reflection, this is not what one should deduce from the logic as set out. The logical structure of each subjective moment is defined as encoding its relative past and anticipated future states (an

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 Oct 2013, at 22:20, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Forget Everett, forget Quantum Mechanics, even in pure Newtonian physics subjective indeterminacy exists because of lack of information. If you knew the exact speed

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread Telmo Menezes
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:34, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 7:13 AM, David Nyman wrote: However, on reflection, this is not what one should deduce from the logic as set out. The logical structure of each subjective moment is

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Oct 2013, at 04:18, LizR wrote: On 2 October 2013 14:56, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: There is no particular requirement for CAs to be local, although local CAs are by far easier to study than nonlocal ones, so in practice they usually are (cue obligatory lamp post

Re: The confluence of cosmology and biology

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Oct 2013, at 03:56, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 02:54:51PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 01:30, Russell Standish wrote: The real universe is likely to be 11 dimensional, nonlocal with around 10^{122} states, or 2^{10^{122}} possible universes,

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Oct 2013, at 03:51, chris peck wrote: Hi David Thanks for the response. It was by far the best response Ive had and a pleasure to read. Lets distinguish between conclusions and arguments. I can entertain many bizarre conclusions. I often wonder about an 'infinite plenitude of

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Oct 2013, at 06:56, Pierz wrote: On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 12:46:17 AM UTC+10, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 15:31, Pierz wrote: Maybe. It would be a lot more profound if we definitely *could* reproduce the brain's behaviour. The devil is in the detail as they say.

Re: The canal effect

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Oct 2013, at 10:35, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2013/10/1 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 30 Sep 2013, at 15:56, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Not exactly. And that depends on what we call as science. Many called sciences are pure rubbish, while some other disciplines outside of

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Oct 2013, at 11:04, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 10:09:03AM -0700, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note also that the expression computation have qualia can be misleading. A computation has no qualia, strictly speaking. Only a person

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 12:26:45 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 02 Oct 2013, at 06:56, Pierz wrote: On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 12:46:17 AM UTC+10, Bruno Marchal wrote: Then the reasoning shows (at a meta-level, made possible with the assumption used) how consciousness and

Fwd:

2013-10-02 Thread Stephen Lin
Huh? -- Forwarded message -- In the place where souls meet, we came together and conspired to create the forces which separate us all in service of the greater union. The inevitable lightness of being arises naturally from the requirement that the essence of conceptual thinking

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread John Clark
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: philosophically my low-tech experiment works just as well and is just as uninformative as your hi-tech version. Not at all. In your low tech (using a coin), you get an indeterminacy from coin throwing, And the coin throw was

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 2:04 AM, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 10:09:03AM -0700, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note also that the expression computation have qualia can be misleading. A computation has no qualia, strictly speaking. Only a person supported by

Re: The canal effect

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 1:17 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: All the rest, including theories, must accommodate this fact and not the other way around. The trouble is this fact just refers to a personal feeling and so is useless for social policy: Did you feel that you had free

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/1/2013 11:49 PM, Pierz wrote: On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 3:15:01 PM UTC+10, Brent wrote: On 10/1/2013 9:56 PM, Pierz wrote: Yes, I understand that to be Chalmer's main point. Although, if the qualia can be different, it does present issues - how much and in what way

Re: The canal effect

2013-10-02 Thread Alberto G. Corona
2013/10/2 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net On 10/2/2013 1:17 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: All the rest, including theories, must accommodate this fact and not the other way around. The trouble is this fact just refers to a personal feeling and so is useless for social policy: Did you

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 6:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:09, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 4:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Note also that the expression computation have qualia can be misleading. A computation has no qualia, strictly speaking. Only a person supported by an infinity of

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 7:03 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:34, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 7:13 AM, David Nyman wrote: However, on reflection, this is not what one should deduce from the logic as set out. The

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 9:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I agree with Brent though on this. Your UDA proceeds on the basis that a computer in a single reality (not an infinite sum of calculations - that comes later) can have a 1p. Yes. It has 1p, it is not a zombie. But that 1p, for him, is really defined

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread John Mikes
Brent: ***But no matter how smart I make it, it won't experience lust.* * * 1. lust is not the universal criterion that makes us human, it is only one of our humanly circumscribed paraphernalia we apply in HUMAN thinking and HUMAN complexity with HUMAN language. Can you apply a similar criterion

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread Telmo Menezes
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 9:37 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/2/2013 7:03 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 19:34, meekerdb wrote: On 10/1/2013 7:13 AM, David Nyman wrote: However, on reflection,

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 2:06 PM, John Mikes wrote: Brent: *//*/But no matter how smart I make it, it won't experience lust./ / / 1. lust is not the universal criterion that makes us human, it is only one of our humanly circumscribed paraphernalia we apply in HUMAN thinking and HUMAN complexity with

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread LizR
On 3 October 2013 06:48, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: philosophically my low-tech experiment works just as well and is just as uninformative as your hi-tech version. Not at all. In your low tech (using a coin), you

RE: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread chris peck
Hi Bruno [JC] Because step 3 sucks. [Bruno] Why? You have not yet make a convincing point on this. His point is convincing me. regards. Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 23:18:07 +0200 Subject: Re: What gives philosophers a bad name? From: te...@telmomenezes.com To:

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread LizR
On 3 October 2013 12:38, chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi Bruno *[JC] Because step 3 sucks. * * * * * * ** * * * * * *[Bruno] Why? You have not yet make a convincing point on this. * His point is convincing me. Which point is that? JC said: What question about

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 4:33 PM, LizR wrote: On 3 October 2013 06:48, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: philosophically my low-tech experiment works just as well and is

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On 1 October 2013 23:31, Pierz pier...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe. It would be a lot more profound if we definitely *could* reproduce the brain's behaviour. The devil is in the detail as they say. But a challenge to Chalmer's position has occurred to me. It seems to me that Bruno has

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread LizR
On 3 October 2013 13:15, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Interestingly it appears that most coin tosses may be quantum random, arXiv:1212.0953v1 [gr-qc] (snip) I say most because I know that magicians train themselves to be able to flip a coin and catch it consistently.

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On 2 October 2013 00:46, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 15:31, Pierz wrote: Maybe. It would be a lot more profound if we definitely *could* reproduce the brain's behaviour. The devil is in the detail as they say. But a challenge to Chalmer's position has occurred

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2013 5:15 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 1 October 2013 23:31, Pierz pier...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe. It would be a lot more profound if we definitely *could* reproduce the brain's behaviour. The devil is in the detail as they say. But a challenge to Chalmer's position has occurred

RE: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread chris peck
Hi Liz Is there something wrong with quantum indeterminacy? Apart from the fact the MWI removes it? And that that is the point of MWI? And that probability questions in MWI are notoriously thorny? This is why I resort to the Quantum Suicide experiment or better still to Quantum Russian

Re: What gives philosophers a bad name?

2013-10-02 Thread LizR
On 3 October 2013 14:12, chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi Liz * Is there something wrong with quantum indeterminacy? * Apart from the fact the MWI removes it? And that that is the point of MWI? And that probability questions in MWI are notoriously thorny? OK, and since the

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 2:59:17 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/1/2013 11:49 PM, Pierz wrote: On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 3:15:01 PM UTC+10, Brent wrote: On 10/1/2013 9:56 PM, Pierz wrote: Yes, I understand that to be Chalmer's main point. Although, if the qualia can be

Re: A challenge for Craig

2013-10-02 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 8:23:36 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On 2 October 2013 00:46, Bruno Marchal mar...@ulb.ac.be javascript: wrote: On 01 Oct 2013, at 15:31, Pierz wrote: Maybe. It would be a lot more profound if we definitely *could* reproduce the brain's behaviour.