On 1 Sep, 11:16, Quentin Anciaux <allco....domain.name.hidden> wrote:
> Exactly,
> if mind is a computational process, there is no way for it to know it
> is being simulated on "the level 0" of the real (if there is one).
>
> There would be *no difference* for it if it was simulated on virtual
> machine running on a virtual machine running on a virtual machine
> running on this "level 0".
>
> Peter claims that level 00 is needed... but why ?
I claim that that is a *possiblity* and as such is enough
to show that CTM does not necessarily follow from the computability of
physics.
>If mind is
> computation, level 0 plays no role in consciousness. If CTM is true, I
> could run Peter with an abacus and that Peter would still forcelly
> argues that HE IS ON LEVEL 0... which is totally untrue in that case.
And if I were a wizard I could trapsort you to Narnia and make you
believe you were still in France.
The CTM does indeed have hypotetical implciations about
virtualisation, but nothing follows from that. There is no
implication from "I might be virtualised" to "I am virtualised" any
more than from "I might be BIV.."
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Tue Sep 01 2009 - 04:00:51 PDT