Re: First Person Frame of Reference

From: Bruno Marchal <>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 13:21:58 +0200

At 11:44 05/06/04 -0400, John M wrote:
>Dear Bruno, you made my day.
>your explanation which I asked for (> >I mean a short, concise plain
>language identification.<<) is such that I even hesitate to
>try to follow it.

You should at least try, and *then* hesitate to continue; or better
you continue until you find something which you don't understand
and then ask. Or perhaps realize that I was using logic, and then ponder
if you should study logic or not, to continue, or not.
Aaargh that "logical barrier"!!! I am sure you *imagine* the difficulties.
A passive understanding is just a matter of learning some definitions
and making some simple exercises.

>I may post my formulation (of words) when I feel it good enough
>for a list-scrutiny. (On consciousness see some words below).
>Does you Mmmmhhhh mean your opposing opinion
>(vs a Hhhhmmmm)?

I was suspecting some skepticism with respect to the notion of bit,
which I accept. When you find yourself in Washington (resp. Moscow)
after a duplication, you are getting one bit of information through
a measurement process.

>Thanks for the trouble to write, I will try to extract of it whatever
>echoes some understanding in my little mind.

Little mind? In French this is very pejorative. I guess it isn't, in English.

>PS. The e-mail battle against 'consciousness' was based upon the Tucson
>conferences where thousands of scientists from dozens of countries could not
>agree in defining it. My opinion was: it is a historical noumenon for some
>mental idiom - from ages when the then epistemic level of the cognitive
>inventory did not allow an intelligent formulation amd nowadays every author
>includes an identification that fits his theory. It is still going on. I
>volunteered a definition in total generalization (not sure if I still
>totally agree):
>"Acknowledgement of and response to information" not restricted
>to humans, rather generalized to 'everything' (this was before my
>participation in the 'everything' list) as a "pan-sensitivity". The
>"response" may be activity, or just storage, unrestricted. Information I
>coined as 'difference' accepted.
>References? it was in many dozens of list-e-mails on I guess 8 diverse lists
>over a decade. I my have most of them in the mess on my *hard* disk. (Hard
>to find on it). - JM

OK. We can discuss it later in some consciousness thread.

Received on Wed Jun 09 2004 - 07:18:17 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:09 PST