On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Alberto G.Corona <agocorona.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>
> Therefore I think that I answer your question: itīs not only
> information; Itīs about a certain kind of information and their own
> processor. The exact nature of this processor that permits qualia is
> not known; thats true, and itīs good from my point of view, because,
> for one side, the unknown is stimulating and for the other,
> reductionist explanations for everything, like the mine above, are a
> bit frustrating.
>
Given that we don't have an understanding of the subjective process by
which we experience the world, I think we should be skeptical about
the nature of WHAT we experience.
All that I can really conclude is that my experience of reality is one
of the set of all possible experiences.
But I'm reasonably convinced that our experience of reality is all
there is to reality. All possible experiencers are actual to
themselves.
If you accept that a computer simulation of a human brain is
theoretically possible (which I think you should given your
functionalist views), and you then accept that such a simulation would
be conscious in the same way as a real human is conscious, and then
you start pondering WHY that would be, I think my point above is a
(the?) logical conclusion.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Sun May 17 2009 - 18:57:14 PDT