Re: Maudlin's argument

From: 1Z <peterdjones.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 06:37:53 -0700

Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

> I was using "quantum state" as synonymous with "physical state", which I guess
> is what you are referring to in the above paragraph. The observer sees a classical
> universe because in observing he collapses the wave function or selects one branch
> of the multiverse. Traditional computationalism ignores the other branches/ other
> elements of the superposition,

Traditional computationalism doesn't say anything about physics
other than the background assumption that it allows
for computation.

> but you have implied previously that these are
> necessary for consciousness because they allow implementation of counterfactuals.

i.e. Consciousness must supervene on N>1 branches, if computationalism
and quantum MW are both true.

> Does that mean consciousness would be impossible in a classical universe?

No, because classical counterfactuals are exactly that --
things that could have happened but didn't.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Sun Oct 15 2006 - 09:38:11 PDT

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