Re: Why I am I?

2010-02-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Jan 2010, at 20:27, RMahoney wrote: On Jan 8, 12:38 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Welcome RMahoney, Nice thought experiments. But they need amnesia (like in going from you to Cruise). I tend to think like you that it may be the case that we are the same person (like those

Re: Why I am I?

2010-01-28 Thread RMahoney
On Jan 8, 12:38 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Welcome RMahoney, Nice thought experiments. But they need amnesia (like in going from   you to Cruise). I tend to think like you that it may be the case that   we are the same person (like those who result from a self- duplication,  

Re: Why I am I?

2010-01-08 Thread Bruno Marchal
Welcome RMahoney, Nice thought experiments. But they need amnesia (like in going from you to Cruise). I tend to think like you that it may be the case that we are the same person (like those who result from a self- duplication, both refer as being the same person as the original, yet

Re: Why I am I?

2010-01-08 Thread russell standish
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 07:38:21PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: And the universal machine is well placed, by Church thesis, to play the role of the main heroin. I think. Could be a Freudian slip - do you mean heroine here, as opposed to heroin the drug? --

Re: Why I am I?

2010-01-07 Thread RMahoney
pretty cool thread (read most but skimmed thru some of it though). I've spent the past 35 or so years (i'm now 56) pondering the subject of why I am I and doing thought experiment after thought experiment with cloning, copies, changing I one particle at a time until I am you or someone else, and

Re: Why I am I?

2010-01-07 Thread RMahoney
pretty cool thread (read most but skimmed thru some of it though). I've spent the past 35 or so years (i'm now 56) pondering the subject of why I am I and doing thought experiment after thought experiment with cloning, copies, changing I one particle at a time until I am you or someone else, and

Re: Why I am I?

2010-01-07 Thread RMahoney
pretty cool thread (read most but skimmed thru some of it though). I've spent the past 35 or so years (i'm now 56) pondering the subject of why I am I and doing thought experiment after thought experiment with cloning, copies, changing I one particle at a time until I am you or someone else, and

Re: Why I am I?

2010-01-01 Thread benjayk
Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2009, at 17:07, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: They are. Numbers are primitive. The variable x and y represents excusively those numbers. Finite pieces of computation are speical numbers, like prime numbers. To be a (finite piece of a)

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-31 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 30 Dec 2009, at 17:07, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: They are. Numbers are primitive. The variable x and y represents excusively those numbers. Finite pieces of computation are speical numbers, like prime numbers. To be a (finite piece of a) computation is a property of

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-30 Thread benjayk
Bruno Marchal wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: The theory explains what exists, and how the rest emerges from it. But then doesn't the rest exist, too? I just see a problem with claiming to explain what exists, when it is really not clear what existance could

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 28 Dec 2009, at 21:22, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: I have never claim it explains something fundamental, it explains a new problem, the problem of justifying how machine dreams glue enough to stabilize first person plural sharable observation. The theory explains what exists,

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-28 Thread benjayk
I willl not reply to all parts of your post in detail, because I think we mainly discuss semantics on some specific issues. I feel we agree on most things either way, it seems pointless to get Bruno Marchal wrote: It's like a theory saying: There is something, but don't aks me what it

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 19 Dec 2009, at 16:13, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Honestly I think you are a bit dishonest to yourself here, since you already presume the appearance of matter, I assume nowhere primitive matter. I do assume consensual reality. If not, I would not post message on a list.

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-19 Thread benjayk
Bruno Marchal wrote: Honestly I think you are a bit dishonest to yourself here, since you already presume the appearance of matter, I assume nowhere primitive matter. I do assume consensual reality. If not, I would not post message on a list. Well, that was my point. So indeed

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-13 Thread Rex Allen
But since practically anything can represent nearly anything else, it's ultimately all in the mind of the beholder. The representation must account for the observation. Hmmm? I'm not sure what you're saying here. How would the representation account for the observation? Do you mean that

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-13 Thread Rex Allen
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:17 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 09 Dec 2009, at 20:51, Rex Allen wrote: We see evolution...but it only exists in our minds, as a tool for our understanding. It's not something that exists in the world. Again, taking the physicalist view. We see

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 12 Dec 2009, at 19:11, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2009, at 03:23, benjayk wrote: For me numbers don't make independent sense of the appearance (!) of matter, too. Since I cannot conceive of any meaning of the number 2 without reffering to some real (in the sense

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-13 Thread Jason Resch
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Though in another way I think we already have a theory of everything a theory can explain *ultimately* (which is *not even remotely* close to everything, since the more you trascend a theory the bigger the

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Dec 2009, at 16:40, Rex Allen wrote: I diagnostic you have still some some trouble grasping completely the 7th and 8th step of UDA, to be frank. It is OK, take it easy. Well, I think I grasp those points. I just don't think that they show that they are the source of conscious

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Dec 2009, at 18:20, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Though in another way I think we already have a theory of everything a theory can explain *ultimately* (which is *not even remotely* close to everything,

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-13 Thread Rex Allen
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: I'm thinking of something similar to the symbol grounding problem: The Symbol Grounding Problem is related to the problem of how words (symbols) get their meanings, and hence to the problem of what

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-12 Thread benjayk
Bruno Marchal wrote: On 10 Dec 2009, at 03:23, benjayk wrote: For me numbers don't make independent sense of the appearance (!) of matter, too. Since I cannot conceive of any meaning of the number 2 without reffering to some real (in the sense of every day usage) object. Then

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-11 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 11 Dec 2009, at 02:40, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:17 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: But if numbers can just exist, and matter can just exist, then why can't conscious experiences just exist? Numbers can just exist, and this is the last

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 09 Dec 2009, at 20:51, Rex Allen wrote: On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 08 Dec 2009, at 09:50, Rex Allen wrote: In such a reality, things just are what they are. If you find some explanations good and others bad, that's just the

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 10 Dec 2009, at 03:23, benjayk wrote: For me numbers don't make independent sense of the appearance (!) of matter, too. Since I cannot conceive of any meaning of the number 2 without reffering to some real (in the sense of every day usage) object. Then all physical theories are

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 10 Dec 2009, at 03:23, benjayk wrote: For me numbers don't make independent sense of the appearance (!) of matter, too. Since I cannot conceive of any meaning of the number 2 without reffering to some real (in the sense of every day usage) object. So I find it unconvincing that

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-10 Thread Jason Resch
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:17 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: But if numbers can just exist, and matter can just exist, then why can't conscious experiences just exist? Numbers can just exist, and this is the last unsolvable mystery. Yet we can explain (assuming comp) why

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-10 Thread benjayk
Brent Meeker-2 wrote: benjayk wrote: Rex Allen wrote: Where could the explanation begin? I'd say there is no explanation. It just is what it is. As Brent said...it's descriptions all the way down. I wouldn't neccesarily disagree, though only if you mean verbal or

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-09 Thread Rex Allen
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 08 Dec 2009, at 09:50, Rex Allen wrote: In such a reality, things just are what they are. If you find some explanations good and others bad, that's just the epiphenominal residue of more fundamental physical processes

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-09 Thread benjayk
Rex Allen wrote: Where could the explanation begin? I'd say there is no explanation. It just is what it is. As Brent said...it's descriptions all the way down. I wouldn't neccesarily disagree, though only if you mean verbal or formal explanation. In a sense our life and our experiences

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-09 Thread Brent Meeker
benjayk wrote: Rex Allen wrote: Where could the explanation begin? I'd say there is no explanation. It just is what it is. As Brent said...it's descriptions all the way down. I wouldn't neccesarily disagree, though only if you mean verbal or formal explanation. In a sense

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-08 Thread Rex Allen
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: So my point is that: in a reductionist theory which implies a physicalist reality with no downwards causation, What defines upwards and downwards. Why would downwards causation make any difference?

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-08 Thread Brent Meeker
Rex Allen wrote: On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: So my point is that: in a reductionist theory which implies a physicalist reality with no downwards causation, What defines upwards and downwards. Why would

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-08 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 08 Dec 2009, at 09:50, Rex Allen wrote: On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: So my point is that: in a reductionist theory which implies a physicalist reality with no downwards causation, What defines upwards and downwards.

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 06 Dec 2009, at 20:35, soulcatcher☠ wrote: Are you physicalist? I just don't know. OK. All my everyday experience points towards physicalism: I'm a brain, embodied in a physical body, embedded in a physical environment and evolved via several billion year selection process. Below, I

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi John, On 06 Dec 2009, at 21:01, John Mikes wrote: Dear Bruno, on diverse lists (I cannot call them 'science-branches' since lately most domains are discussed in considering aspects of several of such on the diverse discussion-lists)- CONCEPTS (I wish I knew a better word) appear

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 06 Dec 2009, at 22:40, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: And what do you mean by stay there? Forever? Why should you stay there (can you choose)? And where is there? Is it forgetfulness oder remembrance? It is very difficult to describe any first person experience. We cannot

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-07 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 07 Dec 2009, at 14:25, Bruno Marchal wrote (to John Mikes) Universal machine - BTW: machine, or God, as in (our) theology A number or machine which through encoding can emulated all possible computable relation between numbers. Examples are given by brain, the DNA genome, physical

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 06 Dec 2009, at 05:07, benjayk wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: It is actually an art to find the dosage and the timing so that you understand better some, well, let us say statements you get there. One is just impossible to memorize, or you stay there, and a copy is send here. This is

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 06 Dec 2009, at 05:21, Johnathan Corgan wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: All of this indicates that salvinorin A has potent but short-lived effects on the brain systems involved in memory, identity, body image and perception of time and

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread soulcatcher☠
Are you physicalist? I just don't know. All my everyday experience points towards physicalism: I'm a brain, embodied in a physical body, embedded in a physical environment and evolved via several billion year selection process. All the constituents of my mind could be explained in the

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread John Mikes
Dear Bruno, on diverse lists (I cannot call them 'science-branches' since lately most domains are discussed in considering aspects of several of such on the diverse discussion-lists)- CONCEPTS (I wish I knew a better word) appear by different content. If somebody has the time and feels like

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Jason Resch
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 1:35 PM, soulcatcher☠ soulcatche...@gmail.comwrote: Are you physicalist? I just don't know. All my everyday experience points towards physicalism: I'm a brain, embodied in a physical body, embedded in a physical environment and evolved via several billion year

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread John Mikes
Rex, or Brent? (I am mixed up between th (-)s and the unmarked text. No signature. I rather paste my cpmment to the end of this posting, since it pertains to the last par.-s. John M On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Rex Allen rexallen...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brent

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread benjayk
Bruno Marchal wrote: And what do you mean by stay there? Forever? Why should you stay there (can you choose)? And where is there? Is it forgetfulness oder remembrance? It is very difficult to describe any first person experience. We cannot even describe normal state of

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Brent Meeker
I mark my small part below with brackets [ ]. John Mikes wrote: Rex, or Brent? (I am mixed up between th (-)s and the unmarked text. No signature. I rather paste my cpmment to the end of this posting, since it pertains to the last par.-s. John M On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Rex Allen

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Rex Allen
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: What is your alternative to the everything universal acid?  That things just are the way they are

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Brent Meeker
Rex Allen wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: What is your alternative to the everything universal

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Rex Allen
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: You seem to be reading a lot into my post. Ha! Ya, once I got going I figured I'd just throw everything in there and see if any of it elicited any interesting feedback. I never said that consciousness is an

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-06 Thread Brent Meeker
Rex Allen wrote: On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: You seem to be reading a lot into my post. Ha! Ya, once I got going I figured I'd just throw everything in there and see if any of it elicited any interesting feedback.

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Dec 2009, at 01:30, Brent Meeker wrote: It is also infinitely ignorant and so long as it remains that way it's nothing to me. We are all infinitely ignorant (if only with respect to arithmetical truth). The universal machine or numbers are not nothing. This is just another form

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread John Mikes
I admire this list. Somebody asks a silly question and 'we' write hourlong wisdom(s) upon it. After my deep liking of Stathis's what difference does it make? (or something to that meaning) - my question went a step deeped: *for: How do I know I am I? - (rather:* How (Why?) do I think I am I?) I

RE: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread rmiller
From: John Mikes [mailto:jami...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:00 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Why I am I? I admire this list. Somebody asks a silly question and 'we' write hourlong wisdom(s) upon it. After my deep liking of Stathis's what

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread Rex Allen
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: What is your alternative to the everything universal acid?  That things just are the way they are (uniquely), and there's ultimately no explanation for that.  Right? Exactly so.  It's just happened

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 05 Dec 2009, at 21:00, Rex Allen wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: What is your alternative to the everything universal acid? That things just are the way they are (uniquely), and there's ultimately no explanation

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread Brent Meeker
Rex Allen wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: What is your alternative to the everything universal acid? That things just are the way they are (uniquely), and there's ultimately no explanation for that. Right?

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Dec 2009, at 20:47, Johnathan Corgan wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: I thought it was impossible to live that and to be able to come back from such an experience, but it happens that with salvia divinorum, some subject can

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread benjayk
Bruno Marchal wrote: It is actually an art to find the dosage and the timing so that you understand better some, well, let us say statements you get there. One is just impossible to memorize, or you stay there, and a copy is send here. This is a copy effect experimented by a

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-05 Thread Johnathan Corgan
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: All of this indicates that salvinorin A has potent but short-lived effects on the brain systems involved in memory, identity, body image and perception of time and space (along with a host of other effects not discussed

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 03 Dec 2009, at 23:12, Brent Meeker wrote: Exactly. It is the magical I that is swapped. That I is magical. It is like swapping both the mind (or 1-I) and the body (or 3-I). Eventually this is the reason why absolute sample of the observer moment does not work, and we need relative

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Brent Meeker
Bruno Marchal wrote: On 03 Dec 2009, at 23:12, Brent Meeker wrote: Exactly.  It is the magical "I" that is swapped. That "I" is magical. It is like swapping both the mind (or 1-I) and the body

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Johnathan Corgan
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: I thought it was impossible to live that and to be able to come back from such an experience, but it happens that with salvia divinorum, some subject can live the experience of quasi-total amnesia, where not only you

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Dec 2009, at 19:15, Brent Meeker wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Those thought experiences are not needed to understand that the physical reality and physical sensations emerge from numbers addition and multiplication, for example, but may be useful to tackle the identity problem

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Brent Meeker
Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Dec 2009, at 19:15, Brent Meeker wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Those thought experiences are not needed to understand that the physical reality and physical sensations emerge from numbers addition and multiplication, for example, but may be useful to

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Rex Allen
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Dec 2009, at 19:15, Brent Meeker wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Those thought experiences are not needed to understand that the physical reality and physical sensations emerge from numbers

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Rex Allen
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Rex Allen wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Science advances in small steps that often depend on technology.  I think the next 'hard' question that has some chance of

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-04 Thread Brent Meeker
Rex Allen wrote: On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Dec 2009, at 19:15, Brent Meeker wrote: Bruno Marchal wrote: Those thought experiences are not needed to understand that the physical reality

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 Dec 2009, at 14:16, soulcatcher☠ wrote: Hi all, every time I read about the anthropic reasoning in physics I can't help asking the more general question: Why I am I, not somebody else? Why I see through _this_ eyes, am confined to _this_ brain, was born in _this_ year, etc? This

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread soulcatcher☠
x This raises the question of how many first person exists. I like the idea that the answer is one. We may be all the universal person appearing and reappearing like if we were already duplicated many times, which makes sense given that we come from the same amoeba. We are like a god who lost

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread soulcatcher☠
Lets consider two hard questions - why do we live in THIS universe? (1) and why am I me? (2). (1) . Why do we live in THIS universe? Here we got: - string theory and anthropic reasoning present us with a landscape of 10^(10^N) universes that we can choose from. - we've got some strong

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
2009/12/3 soulcatcher☠ soulcatche...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: If you were Elvis and Elvis were you, what difference would that make to anything? That would make a huge difference for me and Elvis - my (and his) subjective

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 03 Dec 2009, at 13:38, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 2009/12/3 soulcatcher☠ soulcatche...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: If you were Elvis and Elvis were you, what difference would that make to anything? That would make a huge

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread soulcatcher☠
Apparently it did not work. I am bruno marchal now! Please swish again! :) No! I am Bruno Marchal! Pliz get me out of here :) Do you see the problem in the above exchange? It assumes there is some metaphysical me and you that can be conceptualised as flitting about from one body and mind

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 03 Dec 2009, at 12:12, soulcatcher☠ wrote: x This raises the question of how many first person exists. I like the idea that the answer is one. We may be all the universal person appearing and reappearing like if we were already duplicated many times, which makes sense given that

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Brent Meeker
soulcatcher wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Hi soulcatcher, Good question, it is something I thought about too, then I realized I am me because it was this brain in my skull asking that question. I created the attached image to help

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Brent Meeker
soulcatcher wrote: Lets consider two "hard" questions - "why do we live in THIS universe?" (1) and "why am I me?" (2). (1) . Why do we live in THIS universe? Here we got: - string theory and anthropic reasoning present us with a landscape of 10^(10^N) universes that we can choose

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Brent Meeker
Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 2009/12/3 soulcatcher☠ soulcatche...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: If you were Elvis and Elvis were you, what difference would that make to anything? That would

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Rex Allen
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Science advances in small steps that often depend on technology.  I think the next 'hard' question that has some chance of being answered is, what information processes are necessary and sufficient  to produce

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Brent Meeker
Rex Allen wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote: Science advances in small steps that often depend on technology. I think the next 'hard' question that has some chance of being answered is, what information processes are necessary and sufficient

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 03 Dec 2009, at 19:56, Brent Meeker wrote: Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 2009/12/3 soulcatcher☠ soulcatche...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: If you were Elvis and Elvis were you, what difference would that make to anything?

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-03 Thread Brent Meeker
Bruno Marchal wrote: On 03 Dec 2009, at 19:56, Brent Meeker wrote: Stathis Papaioannou wrote: 2009/12/3 soulcatcher☠ soulcatche...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: If

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-02 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
2009/12/3 soulcatcher☠ soulcatche...@gmail.com: Hi all, every time I read about the anthropic reasoning in physics I can't help asking the more general question: Why I am I, not somebody else? Why I see through _this_ eyes, am confined to _this_ brain, was born in _this_ year, etc? This

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-02 Thread benjayk
soulcatcher-2 wrote: Hi all, every time I read about the anthropic reasoning in physics I can't help asking the more general question: Why I am I, not somebody else? Why I see through _this_ eyes, am confined to _this_ brain, was born in _this_ year, etc? This question seems to me of

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-02 Thread soulcatcher☠
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: If you were Elvis and Elvis were you, what difference would that make to anything? That would make a huge difference for me and Elvis - my (and his) subjective experiences would be very different. And, as these

Re: Why I am I?

2009-12-02 Thread soulcatcher☠
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Hi soulcatcher, Good question, it is something I thought about too, then I realized I am me because it was this brain in my skull asking that question.  I created the attached image to help illustrate my point.  If each