Jesse Mazer wrote:
>I don't really think there's some "other metaphysical realm" where we get
>dropped from, but I do think that, as an analogy, the spotlight one is not
>actually so bad. After all, if you think that you just *are* your current
>observer-moment, how can you possibly become any
> -Original Message-
> From: Jacques Mallah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> The appeal of that kind of model is based on the illusion that we can
> remember past experiences. We can't remember past experiences at all,
> actually. We only experience "memory" because of the _current_ wa
> -Original Message-
> From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, 7 September 2001 6:39 a.m.
> Hmm, I think we actually have a full spectrum of opinions here...Jacques
> believes only in absolute probability, Bruno believes only in conditional
> probabilities, and I beli
>From: "Jesse Mazer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>From: "Jacques Mallah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>"You" is just a matter of definition. As for the conditional
>>effective probability of an observation with characteristics A given that
>>it includes characteristics B, p(A|B), that is automatically def
>From: Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Conditional probability & continuity of consciousness (was:
>Date: Jeu, 6 Sep 01 10:53:17 +0100
>
>Charles Goodwin wrote:
> >
> >I don't see how you can talk about the &q
Charles Goodwin wrote
>> From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>
>> Well, I hope you'd agree that which observer-moment I am
>> right now is not a
>> "matter of definition," but a matter of fact. My opinion is
>> that the global
>> measure on all observer-moments is not telling us somethi
> -Original Message-
> From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Well, I hope you'd agree that which observer-moment I am
> right now is not a
> "matter of definition," but a matter of fact. My opinion is
> that the global
> measure on all observer-moments is not telling us somethin
7 matches
Mail list logo
