RE: computationalism and supervenience

From: Stathis Papaioannou <stathispapaioannou.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:32:14 +1000

Bruno Marchal writes:

> > The other sticking point is, given computationalism
> > is right, what does it take to implement a computation? There have
> > been arguments
> > that a computation is implemented by any physical system (Putnam,
> > Searle, Moravec)
> > and by no physical system (Maudlin, Bruno Marchal).
>
>
>
> OK. To be sure Maudlin would only partially agree. Maudlin shows (like
> me) that we have:
>
> NOT COMP or NOT PHYSICAL SUPERVENIENCE

That sentence summarises the problem pretty well. We have to agree that there is this dichotomy before proceeding further, and I don't think most computationalists do.

Stathis Papaioannou
_________________________________________________________________
Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail.
http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 - 23:34:05 PDT

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