Re: Epiphenomenalism

2012-09-28 Thread meekerdb
On 9/28/2012 10:55 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 27 Sep 2012, at 19:18, meekerdb wrote: On 9/27/2012 9:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: I object to the idea that consciousness will cause a brain or other machine to behave in a way not predictable by purely physical laws. But this cannot

Fwd: Fwd: Sokal-type hoax on two theological conferences

2012-09-28 Thread meekerdb
John Clark at least will appreciate this. :-) Original Message To: Skeptic skep...@lists.johnshopkins.edu mailto:skep...@lists.johnshopkins.edu http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/a-sokal-style-hoax-by-an-anti-religious-philosopher-2/ - But today I’m

Re: questions on machines, belief, awareness, and knowledge

2012-09-29 Thread meekerdb
On 9/29/2012 5:43 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: I have understood Brent in such a way that when engineers develop a robot they must just care about functionality to achieve and they can ignore consciousness at all. Whether it appears in the robot or not, it is not a business of engineers. Do you

Re: Epiphenomenalism

2012-09-29 Thread meekerdb
On 9/29/2012 7:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Yes, and the fact that we cannot know which one bears us here and now. The QM indeterminacy is made into a particular first person comp indeterminacy. Where is the here and now if not a localization in a physical world. Perhaps, but you need to

Re: Epiphenomenalism

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 12:34 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 29 Sep 2012, at 21:33, meekerdb wrote: On 9/29/2012 7:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Yes, and the fact that we cannot know which one bears us here and now. The QM indeterminacy is made into a particular first person comp indeterminacy. Where

Re: Forget Zombies, Let's Talk Torture

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 3:18 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: I don't doubt that initial experiments would not yield ideal results. Neural prostheses would initially be used for people with disabilities. Cochlear implants are better than being deaf, but not as good as normal hearing. But technology keeps

Re: Fwd: Sokal-type hoax on two theological conferences

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 4:31 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Hehe. Fine. However, the concrete abstract seems very promising for a theologian. It is clear that Boudry know the concepts that he manage. His abstract is a piece of cake, it is a I solved the Teologian problem of our time! . It is not pure

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 6:54 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Whoever said that does not know what he says: There are great differences between evolutionary designs and rational design, rational designs are, well, rational, but evolutionary designs are idiotic. Mother Nature (Evolution) is a slow and stupid

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 1:26 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 9/30/2012 2:51 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 9/30/2012 6:54 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Whoever said that does not know what he says: There are great differences between evolutionary designs and rational design, rational designs are, well, rational

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 4:28 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: You aren't seeing my point that if human designers are nothing but evolved systems, then they must have the same limitations as evolution itself, unless you can explain why they wouldn't. More nothing buttery. If people are just atoms they must

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 4:56 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 9/30/2012 7:47 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 4:13 AM, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote: On 9/30/2012 5:44 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-09-30 Thread meekerdb
On 9/30/2012 5:29 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: So I am asking you. Why make that distinction? What is the difference that makes a difference? The difference is that human designers have in mind some goal for their design, they can start from a clean sheet or modify and existing design, they

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-01 Thread meekerdb
On 10/1/2012 2:47 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Conservatives are those who find themselves on top and call it 'natural'. What a waste of power to be in the top and wanting to do leave things as they are... In contrast, the progressives supposedly consider themselves in the bottom, but

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-01 Thread meekerdb
On 10/1/2012 3:54 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: You've only demonstrated your own prejudice against reason. no comment Evolution produces many designs that are suboptimal, because natural selection only requires that a design be 'good-enough' suboptimal for what? optimal has a

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-01 Thread meekerdb
On 10/1/2012 3:39 PM, Jason Resch wrote: An interesting perspective on evolution vs. engineering: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdg4mU-wuhI From an engineer who uses evolution to design computers. Notable points: He is unable to understand how some of the outputs of this evolutionary process

Re: structural complexity

2012-10-02 Thread meekerdb
On 10/2/2012 2:57 PM, John Mikes wrote: Stephen (and Bruno?) What I called The Aris - Total- meaning Aristotle's maxim that /the 'whole' is bigger than the sum of its parts/ - means something else in MY agnosticism. Originally I included only the fact what Bruno pointed out now: that the PARTS

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/4/2012 6:52 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 09:01:14AM -0400, John Clark wrote: Yes, so a human can jump directly from the tangled mess of DOS to a clean streamlined operating system like LINUX, but Evolution can only add even more tangled bells and whistles to DOS.

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/4/2012 7:31 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:02:59PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: On 10/4/2012 6:52 PM, Russell Standish wrote: Both are examples of evolutionary design than revolutionary design, as it were. Another example is the design of x86_64 processors by Intel

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/4/2012 8:54 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:48:01PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: If it is crucially different, then that difference ought to be measurable. Got any ideas? Sure, the ratio of the number of new designs built that didn't work compared to those that did

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/4/2012 9:24 PM, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 9:52 PM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au mailto:li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: Yes, so a human can jump directly from the tangled mess of DOS to a clean streamlined operating system like LINUX, but Evolution

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-05 Thread meekerdb
On 10/5/2012 2:04 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Dear john: 2012/10/4 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com mailto:agocor...@gmail.com Wrote: Mother Nature (Evolution) is a slow and stupid tinkerer, it had over 3

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-05 Thread meekerdb
On 10/5/2012 4:56 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 1:32 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/5/2012 2:04 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Dear john: 2012/10/4 John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com

Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video discussingthe dual aspect theory

2012-10-05 Thread meekerdb
On 10/5/2012 5:15 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 07:33:53AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist I appreciate your suggestion, but I am already convinced, and have other sources besides that. What I'm looking for is a book which gives the central

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-05 Thread meekerdb
On 10/5/2012 6:48 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 06:32:21PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: Do we have any reason to believe ideas reproduce with variation and then those that reproduce most successfully rise to consciousness? THAT would be a Darwinian theory of consciousness

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-05 Thread meekerdb
On 10/5/2012 8:00 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/5/2012 4:56 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 1:32 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote

Re: Evolution outshines reason by far

2012-10-05 Thread meekerdb
On 10/5/2012 9:04 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 10:12 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/5/2012 8:00 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote

Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word!

2012-10-06 Thread meekerdb
On 10/6/2012 12:27 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: You mean: all person have an infinity of relative incarnation in arithmetic. This is not entirely trivial to prove. You can't attribute to people statements they don't make. If they did not ignore the 1p-indeterminacy, they would not assume matter.

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-08 Thread meekerdb
On 10/8/2012 8:42 AM, John Clark wrote: 2) Intelligent behavior is NOT associated with subjective experience, in which case there is no reason for Evolution to produce consciousness and I have no explanation for why I am here, and I have reason to believe that I am the only conscious being in

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-08 Thread meekerdb
On 10/8/2012 10:24 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: So the more stimulation you get through your senses of the outside environment the less conscious you become. Huh? Stimulation that you get thorough your senses of the outside environment does not control you. How could you possibly

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-08 Thread meekerdb
On 10/8/2012 11:25 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Monday, October 8, 2012 2:19:56 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/8/2012 10:24 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: So the more stimulation you get through your senses of the outside environment the less conscious you become. Huh?

Re: The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet

2012-10-08 Thread meekerdb
On 10/8/2012 11:45 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: Deutsch is right about the need to advance in Popperian epistemology, which ultimately is evolutionary epistemology. How evolution makes a portion of matter ascertain what is truth in virtue of what and for what purpose. The idea of intelligence

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-08 Thread meekerdb
On 10/8/2012 1:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Monday, October 8, 2012 3:38:42 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/8/2012 11:25 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Monday, October 8, 2012 2:19:56 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/8/2012 10:24 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: So the

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-08 Thread meekerdb
On 10/8/2012 2:10 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Monday, October 8, 2012 4:57:08 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/8/2012 1:25 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Monday, October 8, 2012 3:38:42 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/8/2012 11:25 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Monday,

Re: [foar] Re: The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet

2012-10-09 Thread meekerdb
On 10/8/2012 3:49 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Russell, Question: Why has little if any thought been given in AGI to self-modeling and some capacity to track the model of self under the evolutionary transformations? It's probably because AI's have not needed to operate in environments

Re: [foar] Re: The real reasons we don’t have AGI yet

2012-10-09 Thread meekerdb
On 10/9/2012 4:22 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/9/2012 2:16 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/8/2012 3:49 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Russell, Question: Why has little if any thought been given in AGI to self-modeling and some capacity to track the model of self under the evolutionary

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-09 Thread meekerdb
On 10/9/2012 7:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 08 Oct 2012, at 19:35, meekerdb wrote: On 10/8/2012 8:42 AM, John Clark wrote: 2) Intelligent behavior is NOT associated with subjective experience, in which case there is no reason for Evolution to produce consciousness and I have no explanation

Re: AGI

2012-10-09 Thread meekerdb
On 10/9/2012 8:01 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: In some sense they succeed enough the mirror test. That's enough for me to consider them, well, not just conscious, but as conscious as me, and you. The difference are only on domain competence, and intelligence (in which case it might be that octopus

Re: Yes, Doctor!

2012-10-10 Thread meekerdb
On 10/9/2012 11:54 PM, Kim Jones wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9597345/Afterlife-exists-says-top-brain-surgeon.html Comments, theories, reflections welcome. You pays your money and you makes your choice. Kim Jones I wouldn't say yes to him. He thinks

Re: Impossible connections

2012-10-11 Thread meekerdb
On 10/11/2012 5:17 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Spacetime could not be warped if it were a void. Why not? Spacetime is just the set of relations, i.e. intervals, between events. If those intervals satisfy the Minkowski metric the spacetime is flat. If they don't the spacetime is warped.

Re: Impossible connections

2012-10-11 Thread meekerdb
On 10/11/2012 9:41 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Brent, According to Einstein it takes massive objects to warp spacetime. No, that's wrong. Mass-energy warps spacetime, but the Einstein equations have non-flat solutions with a zero stress-energy tensor. DeSitter showed this shortly after

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-11 Thread meekerdb
On 10/11/2012 10:14 AM, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net mailto:rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Free Will-- You need enough freedom My difficulty with the free will noise is not the will part, you want to do some things and don't want to do others

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-11 Thread meekerdb
On 10/11/2012 1:14 PM, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 1:28 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: It's [free will] a simple enough concept I think that's true, although I may be using a somewhat different meaning of the word simple than you

Re: Conscious robots

2012-10-12 Thread meekerdb
On 10/12/2012 3:40 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: life, consciousness, free will, intelligence I try to give a phsical definition of each one: Life: whathever that maintain its internal entropy in a non trivial way (A diamant is not alive). That is, to make use of hardwired and adquired

Re: Zombieopolis Thought Experiment

2012-10-12 Thread meekerdb
On 10/12/2012 1:39 PM, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: So you see no reason to draw a legal distinction between a banker to takes money from his bank to support a more lavish life style and one who does

Re: Conscious robots

2012-10-12 Thread meekerdb
On 10/12/2012 1:54 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 08:23:33AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Russell Standish Life cannot survive without making choices, like where to go next. To avoid an enemy. To get food. This act of life obviously requires an autonomous choice. Nobody

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of as if ratherthanis

2012-10-14 Thread meekerdb
On 10/14/2012 10:36 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net mailto:rclo...@verizon.net wrote: But if a computer beats you at an intelligent task, it would have to be programmed to do so. And you would have to be educated to do so. which

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of as if ratherthanis

2012-10-14 Thread meekerdb
On 10/14/2012 11:36 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Sunday, October 14, 2012 2:19:14 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/14/2012 10:36 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.net javascript: wrote: But if a computer beats you at an intelligent task, it

Re: Are we part of a vast, living and 3D holographic simulation

2012-10-15 Thread meekerdb
On 10/15/2012 7:33 AM, John Clark wrote: Nick Bostrum, a philosopher at Oxford University wrote an interesting paper on this subject: http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html The following is from the abstract: This paper argues that /at least one/ of the following propositions is

Re: Continuous Game of Life

2012-10-15 Thread meekerdb
On 10/15/2012 9:38 AM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com mailto:whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: I think he [Chambers] goes wrong by assuming a priori that consciousness is functional, I've asked you this question dozens of times

Re: Continuous Game of Life

2012-10-15 Thread meekerdb
On 10/15/2012 9:41 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: And a computer is exquisitely sensitive to particular voltages and not sensitive at all to other voltages that don't make the threshold. Let's see how computer fares under a giant junkyard magnet. Probably better than you will fare

Re: Continuous Game of Life

2012-10-15 Thread meekerdb
On 10/15/2012 11:48 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:42:33 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/15/2012 9:41 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: And a computer is exquisitely sensitive to particular voltages and not sensitive at all to other voltages that don't make

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

2012-10-16 Thread meekerdb
On 10/16/2012 7:44 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Alberto, OK, I am officially confused by your statements. You previously wrote: Magic emergence from magic enough complexity has been advocated for almost anything. and now you suggest that consciousness is contingent on a level of

Re: Continuous Game of Life

2012-10-16 Thread meekerdb
On 10/16/2012 9:37 AM, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:40 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If consciousness doesn't do anything then Evolution can't see it, so how and why did Evolution produce it? The fact that you have no answer

Re: I believe that comp's requirement is one of as if ratherthanis

2012-10-16 Thread meekerdb
On 10/16/2012 10:41 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: *How can reason be created (for the very first time in the cosmos) for a reason (fails because it is circular) * Seems to be a pun on reason = rational thinking and reason = explanatory cause. Brent -- You received this message because you are

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

2012-10-16 Thread meekerdb
On 10/16/2012 12:05 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 2:42:26 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/16/2012 7:44 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Alberto, OK, I am officially confused by your statements. You previously wrote: Magic emergence from magic enough

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

2012-10-16 Thread meekerdb
On 10/16/2012 12:41 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/16/2012 2:42 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/16/2012 7:44 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi Alberto, OK, I am officially confused by your statements. You previously wrote: Magic emergence from magic enough complexity has been advocated

Re: Code length = probability distribution

2012-10-19 Thread meekerdb
On 10/19/2012 10:54 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: Hi, I was looking up a definition and found the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_description_length Central to MDL theory is the one-to-one correspondence between code length functions and probability distributions. (This

Re: A test for solipsism

2012-10-20 Thread meekerdb
On 10/20/2012 5:48 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/20 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net mailto:rclo...@verizon.net Hi Bruno Marchal In that definition of a p-zombie below, it says that a p-zombie cannot experience qualia, and qualia are what the senses tell you. The mind

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

2012-10-20 Thread meekerdb
On 10/20/2012 10:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Dear Stephen, On 19 Oct 2012, at 19:44, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/19/2012 1:37 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 17 Oct 2012, at 22:02, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/17 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com mailto:agocor...@gmail.com

Re: Is consciousness just an emergent property of overly complexcomputations ?

2012-10-21 Thread meekerdb
On 10/21/2012 6:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: And their very specific correlation with the physical brain states of sleep. Of course. But this is taken into account in the theoretical reasoning where we suppose the brain state are obtained by (immaterial) machine doing the computation at the

Re: Continuous Game of Life

2012-10-22 Thread meekerdb
On 10/22/2012 12:51 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: 2012/10/22 Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 12:46 PM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be

Re: Interactions between mind and brain

2012-10-23 Thread meekerdb
On 10/22/2012 11:35 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/22/2012 6:05 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: I don't understand why you're focusing on NP-hard problems... NP-hard problems are solvable algorithmically... but not efficiently. When I read you (I'm surely misinterpreting), it seems like you're

Re: Interactions between mind and brain

2012-10-23 Thread meekerdb
On 10/23/2012 3:40 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/23/2012 2:03 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/22/2012 11:35 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/22/2012 6:05 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: I don't understand why you're focusing on NP-hard problems... NP-hard problems are solvable algorithmically

Re: Kant's Refutation of (Problematic) Idealism

2012-10-23 Thread meekerdb
On 10/23/2012 2:39 PM, Russell Standish wrote: I have not met this argument before. I have comments interspersed. On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 08:04:35AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Kant's Refutation of (Problematic) Idealism Problematic Idealism (Berkeley's idealism, not that of Leibniz) is the

Re: Kant's Refutation of (Problematic) Idealism

2012-10-23 Thread meekerdb
On 10/23/2012 3:20 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:47:12PM -0700, meekerdb wrote: On 10/23/2012 2:39 PM, Russell Standish wrote: 2) can be aware of having experiences that occur in a specific temporal order only if I perceive something permanent by reference

Re: Interactions between mind and brain

2012-10-23 Thread meekerdb
On 10/23/2012 3:35 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/23/2012 1:29 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/23/2012 3:40 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/23/2012 2:03 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/22/2012 11:35 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/22/2012 6:05 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: I don't understand why

Re: wave function collapse

2012-10-23 Thread meekerdb
On 10/23/2012 5:50 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb There are a number of theories to explain the collapse of the quantum wave function (see below). 1) In subjective theories, the collapse is attributed to consciousness (presumably of the intent or decision to make a measurement

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-23 Thread meekerdb
On 10/23/2012 6:33 PM, Max Gron wrote: On Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:19:08 AM UTC+10:30, Rex Allen wrote: On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Jason Resch jason...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Rex Allen rexall...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:

Re: wave function collapse

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 4:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Oct 2012, at 14:50, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb There are a number of theories to explain the collapse of the quantum wave function (see below). 1) In subjective theories, the collapse is attributed to consciousness (presumably

Re: Descartes' definition of existence

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 4:49 AM, Roger Clough wrote: According to Descartes, the physical is that which has extension in space. That's a common definition of existence. That would imply that electrons and quarks don't exist. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: Can you think of an experiment to verify comp ?

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 4:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Oct 2012, at 15:35, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Nothing is true, even comp, until it is proven by experiment. Then your own consciousness is false, which I doubt. But I do experience my consciousness. Then the existence even of

Re: Interactions between mind and brain

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 4:56 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb Just because something has no extension in space I wrote location not extension - don't misquote me. (physical existence) doesn't mean it doesn't exist mentally, for example in Platonia. But existing mentally isn't the same

Re: Predictive physiological anticipation preceding seemingly unpredictable stimuli: a meta-analysis

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 5:31 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: http://www.frontiersin.org/Perception_Science/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00390/abstract Comments? Woo-woo. Small effect sizes which are *statistically* significant are indicative of bias errors. I'd wager a proper Bayesian analysis of the original

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 7:56 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:21:23 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/23/2012 6:33 PM, Max Gron wrote: On Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:19:08 AM UTC+10:30, Rex Allen wrote: On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Jason Resch

Re: Code length = probability distribution

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 11:58 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/23 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be On 22 Oct 2012, at 21:50, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/22 Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net mailto:stephe...@charter.net On 10/22/2012 2:38 AM,

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 3:11 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:52:06 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/24/2012 7:56 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:21:23 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/23/2012 6:33 PM, Max Gron wrote: On Sunday,

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 5:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: That's right. The meaning, the what is represented, is given by interaction (including speech) with the environment (including others). So only a computer with the ability to interact can seem intelligent and therefore

Re: Continuous Game of Life

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 6:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:04 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com wrote I think you are missing

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 6:39 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Note that I too agree with that bit about the interpreter of information being needed for information to have any objective meaning. But that's just a semantic explanation since interpreter and how we would know whether or not

Re: What If A Zombie Is What You Need?

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 6:59 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: If we turn the Fading Qualia argument around, what we get is a world in which Comp is true and it is impossible to simulate cellular activity without evoking the presumed associated experience. If we wanted to test a new painkiller for instance,

Re: Continuous Game of Life

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 8:48 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Oct 24, 2012, at 9:02 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/24/2012 6:27 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:04 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote

Re: What If A Zombie Is What You Need?

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle, which are pretty smart as computers go. We manage not to think about starving children in Africa, and they *are* humans. And we ignore the looming disasters

Re: What If A Zombie Is What You Need?

2012-10-24 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 10:19 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:10:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle, which are pretty smart as computers go.

Re: What If A Zombie Is What You Need?

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/24/2012 10:48 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:29:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/24/2012 10:19 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:10:24 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

Re: Strings are not in space-time, they are on space-time

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 4:58 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Stephan, Since yesterday it occurred to me that you may be thinking of the 10 or more dimensions of string theory as being orthogonal because they were so before the big bang. But the dimensions that curled-up/compactified went out of orthogonality

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 5:17 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 2) Dennett on qualia In Consciousness Explained (1991) and Quining Qualia (1988),[19] Daniel Dennett offers an argument against qualia that attempts to show that the above definition breaks down when one tries to make a practical application of it.

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
Good points. The contrast is usually qualia-v-quanta. I think color can be communicated and we have an RGB language for doing so that makes it more quanta than qualia. So extending your point to Schrodinger, if you're a wine connoisseur you have a language for communicating the taste of wine.

Re: Against Mechanism

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 7:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Oct 2012, at 20:51, meekerdb wrote: On 10/24/2012 7:56 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:21:23 AM UTC-4, Brent wrote: On 10/23/2012 6:33 PM, Max Gron wrote: On Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:19:08 AM UTC+10

Re: Code length = probability distribution

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 8:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Oct 2012, at 22:20, meekerdb wrote: On 10/24/2012 11:58 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/23 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be On 22 Oct 2012, at 21:50, Alberto G. Corona wrote: 2012/10/22 Stephen P

Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 10:49 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Stephen P. Kingstephe...@charter.net wrote: On 10/25/2012 11:52 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/25/2012 4:58 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Stephan, Since yesterday it occurred to me that you may be thinking of the 10

Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 11:47 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/25/2012 10:49 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Stephen P. Kingstephe...@charter.net wrote: On 10/25/2012 11:52 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/25

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 3:01 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net: On 10/25/2012 5:16 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com: On Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:58:33 PM UTC-4, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: You can identify a

Re: Solipsism = 1p

2012-10-25 Thread meekerdb
On 10/25/2012 4:38 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Craig Weinbergwhatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Intentionally lying, defying it's programming, committing murder would all be good indicators. Generally when an error is blamed on the computer itself rather than

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

2012-10-26 Thread meekerdb
On 10/26/2012 4:51 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb Quanta do exist, and can be measured, but by definition they can only be experienced as qualia, (another word for experience) which can't be measured. Well that's the point isn't it. Quanta are what can be shared, and they can be shared

Re: Even more compact dimensions Re: Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

2012-10-26 Thread meekerdb
On 10/26/2012 5:00 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Brent, What happens -- or is it even possible -- to collapse the dimensions down to one (which I conjecture might be time), or zero (Platonia or mind). I'm not sure what you mean by 'collapse'. Do you mean, Is is possible to invent a theory

Re: comp and functionalism

2012-10-26 Thread meekerdb
On 10/26/2012 5:07 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Stathis Papaioannou It is suggested that computers can possibly simulate the mind at least functionally, perhaps it has already been done: At least they've already simulated the mind of mathematicians. :-) ... this is pure math-fun,

Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

2012-10-26 Thread meekerdb
On 10/26/2012 5:08 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: No Roger, In string theory dimensions are conserved but can undergo extreme modification such as in compactification where formerly orthogonal dimensions become embedded in 3D space in spite of what Brent thinks. Do you have a reference that

Re: What If A Zombie Is What You Need?

2012-10-26 Thread meekerdb
On 10/26/2012 5:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Oct 2012, at 07:10, meekerdb wrote: On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle, which are pretty smart as computers go. We manage not to think about starving

Re: Strings are not in space-time, they are on space-time

2012-10-26 Thread meekerdb
On 10/26/2012 6:19 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Well, in defense of Craig, or of the devil, this has not been proved. The problem occurs, or at least is easy to prove only when we make the digital assumption. This entails a truncation of the subject, local and relative (its mind code) which by the

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

2012-10-26 Thread meekerdb
On 10/26/2012 6:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Oct 2012, at 18:57, meekerdb wrote: Good points. The contrast is usually qualia-v-quanta. I think color can be communicated and we have an RGB language for doing so that makes it more quanta than qualia. So extending your point

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >