--- Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
> Jacques Mallah [wrote]:
> >My view is that math is fundamental. Ideas should
> >be derivable from the math of computations. The
> >physical world is real in that it is mathematical.
>
> OK Jacques. But then I call you a (platonist sort
> of) idealist. (Just a question of terminology).
> And I'm not sure I understand the "the" in "the
> physical world".
By 'the' I mean the one I see; I do not imply it's
the only one.
> Brent Meeker wrote:
> >It depends on what you take as fundamental. From a
> >Cartesian viewpoint, thoughts and perceptions are
> >fundamental - all else, including physics, is
> >inferred and constructed from the coherence and
> >relations we perceive. Hence to use physics to
> >explain that coherence and consistency is somewhat
> >circular.
It depends on what you mean by "explain".
> Jacques Mallah wrote:
> > In the case of observers, implementing a conscious
> >computation (OM) can be a property of the
substrate,
> >and this property I consider automatically present
> >if the math is right without needing psychophysical
> >laws. I thus reduce consciousness to math.
>
> What substrate? How will you define or recognize a
> substrate within the math.
The substrate is all of the math. For example,
you use a substrate, in the form of a UD.
> I think I agree with you, except I am not sure you
> actually propose a precise mean[s] for
> the reduction of consciousness to math.
When I get my criterion for implementation, and
neuroscience tells us more about which computations
the human brain does, it will be as precise as can be
expected.
=====
- - - - - - -
Jacques Mallah (jackmallah.domain.name.hidden)
Physicist / Many Worlder / Devil's Advocate
"I know what no one else knows" - 'Runaway Train', Soul Asylum
My URL:
http://hammer.prohosting.com/~mathmind/
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
Received on Wed May 31 2000 - 10:09:10 PDT