On 01 Sep 2009, at 13:26, David Nyman wrote:
> Bruno hasn't
> yet persuaded me that an explicitly non-computational theory of mind
> on some such basis is actually untenable.
I don't think I have ever said that.
All what I propose is a (constructive) proof of the following
equivalent propositions:
- CTM implies physics is a branch of computer science (alias machine
theology, number theory, etc...)
- CTM & Physicalism entails (constructively) that 00 = 1
- Physicalism entails that any theory of mind should rely on actual
big infinities
The proof is constructive: CTM implies that physics, in all its
precision, can be found in this way ..... (self-reference logic, etc.).
But the proof can be indeed weakened. We have still the reversal with
transfinite weakening of comp. Hypermachine, oracles, etc. does not
change the result. To keep physicalism intact we need a mind close to
being, not a god, but *the * God, if that is not inconsistent. Who
knows? In that case, comp, or CTM, is false.
Bruno
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 Tue Sep 01 2009 - 13:54:43 PDT