Re: computationalism and supervenience

From: 1Z <>
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 09:28:48 -0700

Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

> > > Now, suppose some more complex variant of 3+2=3 implemented on your abacus has consciousness associated with it, which is just one of the tenets of computationalism. Some time later, you are walking in the Amazon rain forest and notice that
> > > ****under a certain mapping****
> >
> >
> > > of birds to beads and trees to wires, the forest is implementing the same computation as your abacus was. So if your abacus was conscious, and computationalism is true, the tree-bird sytem should also be conscious.
> >
> > No necessarily, because the mapping is required too. Why should
> > it still be conscious if no-one is around to make the mapping.
> Are you claiming that a conscious machine stops being conscious if its designers die
> and all the information about how it works is lost?

You are, if anyone is. I don't agree that computation *must* be
although they *can* be re-interpreted.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Sat Sep 09 2006 - 13:25:27 PDT

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