Re: computationalism and supervenience

From: 1Z <peterdjones.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 18:56:24 -0000

David Nyman wrote:
> Tom Caylor wrote:
>
> S_p
> > can be expressed by a finite number, since the substitution itself can
> > be expressed by a finite number (whatever is written on the tape/CD or
> > other storage/transmitting device).
>
> Does your 'interpretation' of 'Yes doctor' leave open all assumptions
> about actual *instantiation* of S_p? You refer above to the 'tape/CD or
> other storage/transmitting device'. Is an additional act of faith
> required such that we trust the doctor not merely to leave S_p to
> gather dust on a shelf? Or, if he does cause the instantiation of S_p
> (even assuming it to be equivalent to S_c) in terms of some
> unconstrained choice among arbitrarily many machine 'architectures'
> (electronic, hydraulic, mechanical, Platonic, you-name-it) I am to
> further trust that my experience will remain invariant to the actual
> physical behaviour thus enacted? Or is the assumption of YD within a
> 'comp' that additionally assumes AR+CT supposed to subsume all the
> above issues, and if so why?

Suppose you were faced with two Doctors: Dr 1 promises
to reproduce you approximately in a robotic body that can
interact with the environment. Dr 2 promises to
reproduce you exactly, and leave the resulting tape gathering dust...


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Mon Aug 21 2006 - 14:58:17 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:12 PST