Brent,
I try to single out where you depart from the comp hyp, to focus on the
essential. I could add comments later on other paragraphs of your
posts.
Le 03-déc.-08, à 19:22, Brent Meeker a écrit :
> But there is causality. The sequence of events in the movie are
> directly caused
> by the projector, but they have a causal linkage back to Alice and the
> part of
> her environment that is captured in the movie. I see no principled
> reason to
> consider only the immediate cause and not refer back further in the
> chain of
> causation.
If this were true, I don't see why I could say yes to a doctor for an
artificial brain. I have to take account of the "traceability" of all
part of the artificial brain. You have a problem with the "qua
computatio" part of the MEC+MAT hypotheses, I think.
This is coherent with the fact that you have still some shyness with
the step six, if I remember well. They will be opportunity to come
back.
I have to go now.
Bruno
PS Abram. I think I will have to meditate a bit longer on your
(difficult) post. You may have a point (hopefully only pedagogical :)
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Thu Dec 04 2008 - 06:28:50 PST