Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Le 27-déc.-06, à 19:10, Jef Allbright a écrit :
>> All meaning is necessarily within context.
>
> OK, but all context could make sense only to
> some universal meaning. I mean I don't know,
> it is difficult.
But this can be seen in a very consistent way. The significance of an event is proportional to the scope of its effect relative to the values of the observer.
With increasing context of self-awareness, subjective values increasingly resemble principles of the physical universe. Why? Because making basic choices against the way the universe actually works would be a losing strategy, becoming increasingly obvious with increasing context of awareness.
Since all events are the result of interactions following the laws of the physical universe, the difference between events and values decreases with increasing context of awareness, thus the significance, or meaningfulness of events also decreases.
With an ultimate, god's eye view of the universe, there would be no meaning at all. Things would simply be as they are.
From the point of view of an agent undergoing long-term development within the universe, its values would increasingly converge on "what works", i.e. principles of effective interaction with the physical world, while the expression of those values would become increasingly diverse in a fractal manner, optimizing for robust ongoing growth.
>> The statement "I am conscious", as usually intended
>> to mean that one can be absolutely certain of one's
>> subjective experience, is not an exception, because
>> it's not even coherent. It has no objective context
>> at all. It mistakenly assumes the existence of an
>> observer somehow in the privileged position of being
>> able to observe itself.
>
> Machine have many self-referential abilities. I can
> develop or give references (I intend to make some
> comments on such book later).
>
>
>> Further, there's a great deal of empirical evidence
>> showing that the subjective experience that people
>> report is full of distortions, gaps, fabrications,
>> and confabulations.
>
> But this is almost a consequence of the self-referential
> ability of machine, they can distort their own view, and
> even themselves. I talk about universal machine
> *after Godel* (and Post, Turing,..
I'm in interesting in following up on this line of thought given available time.
- Jef
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Dec 27 2006 - 17:41:22 PST