Hi Bruno Marchal
How does comp include subjectivity ?
Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
10/6/2012
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-10-06, 08:48:04
Subject: Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video
discussingthedual aspect theory
Hi Roger Clough,
On 06 Oct 2012, at 12:46, Roger Clough wrote:
> Hi Bruno Marchal
>
> I understand that comp does not include subjectivity,
> but that's just explicitly.
?
Comp is defined by the invariance of subjectivity for some transforms,
so it includes subjectivity at the start.
And, in the conclusion, it gives to subjectivity and consciousness the
quasi primary goal for everything, except the numbers that we, and all
scientists, have to postulate initially.
I have no clue why you think that comp does not include subjectivity.
Comp is the theological believe in the possibility in a form of
technological reincarnation. This assumes subjectivity and persons in
an important way.
The consequence is that you survive anyway, and that "dying" is no
more logically possible or even meaningfull, but that is in the
consequence. I don't know if it is true, but the whole theory (comp)
is testable, as physics is entirely retrievable in comp (and up to
now, it gives the correct quantum logic).
> Perhaps something can be made of the
> results, like extract energy (structure, which I take to be an
> essential of consciousness) from the results. Hmmm.
> That would be a numerical caclulation. Could you be wrong ?
Sure. Comp can be wrong, and my argument can be wrong too, but then
the argument is precise enough so that you if you assert that it is
wrong, you have to find where (if enough polite 'course).
> Perhaps mind, like Maxwell's Demon, "makes sense of"
> raw experience. Finds structure or whatever. That's
> called Secondness.
Yes. That is what all universal systems do all the "time", almost
everywhere, in arithmetic. They build sense from patterns, in a
variated inexhaustible number of manner, and this by "participating"
simultaneously to infinities of computations (that is special number
relations).
> I wonder if something like this, used as a (Secondness) filter on
> the (Firstness)
> output of comp , could provide (Thirdness) structured consciousness.
It is not entirely meaningless, but it still assumes Aristotle, and
does not really approach the question in philosophy of mind/matter. It
assumes the basic Aristotelian metaphysics which I argue to be
logically incompatible with comp.
There is not output to comp, as comp is not a program or a machine,
but a theory, which just postulates that your subjective life is
invariant for a a digital change made at some description level of
your brain or body. The consequence is that the brain and your body
are emergent relative patterns in arithmetic. It makes the whole
physics a branch of the theology of numbers, itself part of arithmetic.
Comp is just the assumption that we are machine. It is the favorite
hypothesis of the materialist, which are understandably not happy with
the result which is that comp is incompatible with even very weak
version of materialism (the belief in the existence of Matter or
primary matter and that is a relation with the matter we can observe).
COMP+ WEAK-MATERIALISM ==> 0 = 1.
To be sure, COMP is still compatible, logically, with the existence of
primary matter as an epinoumenon (that is a Matter not related to
anything we can subjectively observe).
Assuming comp things should be like that:
NUMBER ===> CONSCIOUSNESS > MATTER
> IMHO mind is constructive mathematics,
> creating meaningful structures from raw experience.
That intuition is confirmed by the math of comp + the classical theory
of knowledge (Plato, Theaetetus, ...): the third hypostase (Bp & p)
describe a constructivist intuitionist subject close to Brouwer theory
of consciousness. Indeed. Like the logic of matter justifies quantum
logic (without assuming anything physical).
Bruno
>
>
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
> 10/6/2012
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>
>
> - Receiving the following content -
> From: Bruno Marchal
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-10-05, 11:13:06
> Subject: Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice video
> discussingthe dual aspect theory
>
>
> Hi Richard, Stephen, Roger,
>
> Dual aspect theories are plausibly incompatible with comp. In that
> sense Craig is more coherent, but Stephen, and Chalmers, seems not.
> They avoid the comp necessary reformulation of the mind-body problem.
> It is still Aristotle theory variants, unaware of the first person
> indeterminacy.
> It might be compatible with comp, but then this asks for a non trivial
> der
