Re: [Fwd: NDPR David Shoemaker, Personal Identity and Ethics: A Brief Introduction]

From: GŁnther Greindl <>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:06:33 +0100


>> My idea was rather that the instantiations would not correspond to
>> numbers in the first place
> But that would violate the comp assumption.

No, you still misunderstand me ;-) not correspond in the sense of
non-existing, not in the sense of existing but not number.

>> - that is why the aliens could destroy the
>> machine (it follows from 3-det that something _had_ to happen to
>> prevent
>> successor states which wouldn't correspond to numbers).
> But machines are secondary. The "physical machines" are pattern
> emerging in the mind of persons themselves emerging from the relation
> between numbers. I don't see how aliens could manage a machine not to
> have successors.

The idea was that the numbers encode moments which don't have successors
(the guy who transports), that's why there exist alien-OMs encoded in
numbers which destroy all the machines (if we assume that arithmetic is

> If a successor state requires something impossible, *that* successor
> state will be impossible, but it does not mean there will not be other
> successor states, indeed, for mind corresponding on machine's state, a
> continuum of successor states exists.

This is the issue at stake: from what do you gather that all machine
states have a continuum of successor states (the aleph_0/aleph_1 is not
at issue now; it suffices to say: at least one successor state)?

After all, there are halting computations.


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 Fri Mar 06 2009 - 12:06:08 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:15 PST