Re: (offlist) Bruno's argument

From: Quentin Anciaux <>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:16:26 +0200

Hi Stathis,

The fact that comp => no material world is this:

1- If comp is true, then you (the 1st person) is defined by all computations
(an infinity) that pass through your state, hence the "you" does not belong
to one and only one computation.
2- Then as you cannot associate you with a computation you won't be able to
do it in a so called material world if any, because the material world is
perceive through you and you by the preceeding point is generated by all
computation going through this point, hence material world is useless.

The demonstration of Bruno is based on physical supervenience (whether or
not a change in the physical level implies a change in the computation
level). I think the olympia machine of lee maudlin and the movie graph
argument of Bruno show that a computation does not supervene on the material

Another thing is, if you are part of a computation, and somehow someone
succeed to throw you out of it and tells you that now you are in the real
world... How could you know this one is real (despite the fact that you know
the preceeding wasn't in front of evidence showed to you) ? If the first
wasn't real, then why this would be ? why a primary real would exists in
this system ?


On 7/14/06, Stathis Papaioannou <> wrote:
> Quentin,
> I think I can follow Bruno's UDA up to the point of the point where he
> shows that comp => no material world exists. You seem to understand it and
> you aren't Bruno (at least, I assume you're not Bruno: none of us on this
> list can really be sure of these things, can we? ;). Would you be kind
> enough to explain it to me?
> Stathis
> ------------------------------
> > From:
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: SV: Only Existence is necessary?
> > Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:40:20 +0000
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > 1Z wrote:
> > > I will take the stuff that seems solid to me as primary reality until
> > > demostrated
> > > otherwise.
> >
> > This was not the point... the point was to make you understand that
> > Bruno has proved that *IF* computationalism is true *THEN* primary
> > reality does not exists ! It even doesn't mean anything in this
> > context.
> >
> > So the point is not that you accept or not computationalism and
> > stuffy/not stuffy stuff... It is just that if you accept
> > computationalism you cannot accept a primary reality... If you do not
> > (as it seems) then it's normal, but you cannot claim computationalism
> > at the same time, Bruno proved that it is not compatible.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Quentin
> >
> >
> >
> >

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Mon Jul 17 2006 - 05:17:27 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST