High probability of that, but the claim is not there. Again, Norton's dome can result in the same state from multiple different initial states, thus f...
I deny that requirement. It sort of sounds like an idealistic assertion, but I don't think idealism suggests emergent properties. Sure I was on board ...
The mathematics says otherwise. Any quantum decoherence event, say the decay of some nucleus in a brick somewhere, will have an effect on Mars possibl...
I would not buy that suggestion. More probably the intentionality emerges from whatever process is used to implement it. I can think of countless emer...
With that I will agree. It's quite a different statement than the one at which I balked before. How often? Ever time for a chaotic system. Takes time ...
The assertion under question: OK, very much yes on the rapid decay of coherence. But this does not in any way prevent changes from propagating to the ...
We're going in circles. The paper is not about qualia, it is about the first person view, and Chalmers says that the hard problem boils down not to th...
Kind of catching up on posts made since the 8 month dormancy. Depending on definitions, the two are not necessarily exclusive. There you go. You seem ...
Apologies for not seeing that question for months. There are whole books, yes. A nice (but still pop) article is this one: https://www.space.com/chaos...
The title of Chalmers' paper quoted in the OP implies very much that the hard problem boils down to first vs third person, and that qualia are conside...
I think that's what I said. It makes qualia the fundamental issue, not first person, which is, as you call it, mere geometric PoV. Kind of still do, b...
I guess I didn't see much difference between a description and an explanation. My point was that no anything will arrive at the 'experience' part of i...
I can accept that.' It means that all energy and particles and whatnot obey physical law, which yes, pretty much describes relations. That's circular,...
Sure we do. Q3 is easy. The ball-catching robot was one. A fly evading a swat is another. If one is searching for a model, you start simple and work y...
It seems that people are talking about many different issues. Q1: What is the subjective experience of red? More to the point, what is something else'...
I guess I had hoped somebody (the article perhaps) would actually identify those questions and in particular, how physicalism fails in a way that thei...
I agree in part with DEgg. I suspect that more often than not, the conclusion of a separate thing is begged at the start and rationalized from there. ...
One great example of this seems to be the philosophical zombie (p-zombie or PZ) argument. Looking at the way it is presented, the only difference betw...
This already seems to beg your conclusion, that something fundamentally separate from the components of a human is required for a thought to be design...
I deny this. No law of physics is violated by that vague example. In an anthropocentric universe, perhaps humans, as an exception to all other arrange...
I feel the need to drop biased language of calling the two people 'original' and 'duplicate', since that language already biases the answer of which o...
Didn't see topic until late Given such ability, it would seem prudent, if your hand hurts due to arthritis, to simply cut it off and print a new one w...
This seems all contradictory. it would seem that having a survival advantage (being more fit), or being physically causal at all, would constitute a p...
Granted, you've not explicitly said that, but you've excluded everything except 'experience-of'. OK, so the question is, how can consciousness, as you...
This is inconsistent with your assertions. The part that gives the advantage is sensory input and the ability to react to it, all 'things' according t...
You seem to have left nothing to rise to. It becomes a phrase without meaning. Well, I see all that stuff you exclude emerging from physical, but it's...
I said as much in my post, that I knew I was getting it wrong. Calling it experience is just a synonym. It does tell me what a photon experiences desp...
Maybe the ? computation cannot yield zero for anything, so it's not necessarily a difference. After all, IIT seems to be one form of panpsychism, not ...
There is always ? for anything. It might work out to zero, but that's still a ?. Zero I suppose means not conscious at all. Fair enough. Consider a ga...
From what I can tell, consciousness is manifested in information processing. There's a complex computation of ? that is dependent on six factors, so a...
There's plenty of artificial computer devices that do a whole lot more information processing than does what I might consider to be a barely conscious...
The truth of the sum of 2 and 2 being 4 seems to objectively exist, yet isn't considered a substance by many. I have a hard time coming up with other ...
P1) Human consciousness does not supervene on physical processes. P2) Qualia is part of human consciousness C1) Human consciousness is a 2nd kind of p...
Remember that Newton's laws apply to inertial frames only, and don't usually work in other kinds of frames. This also goes for most of the conservatio...
Slow reply, but primarily I am talking about mind interactionism here, which necessitates interaction between mind and physical (usually substances, b...
Sure you can. You can measure its effect on everything else. It does not logically follow from a mere definition that any specific case meets that def...
How do you know this? There are those that disagree and say that consciousness is not a function of the properties of the parts. They also often claim...
M&M was pre-existing evidence, yes, and everybody knew a new theory was needed because of that. Several were working on it and Einstein put out SR sho...
Nice explanation of how Einstein's spacetime curving explains gravitational motion as well as does Newton's force laws. What seems not explained is wh...
First of all, 'prior' is their language, and it isn't a temporal reference. EPP says (without using that contentious word) that 'only existing things ...
The cause of its parents of course. I list what is probably classified by Aristotle as an efficient cause of the elephant. More fundamental would be a...
They are nowhere near sufficiently significant. I cannot think of a scenario, however trivial, where you'd see this. It would be the equivalent of mea...
So much wrong with that sentence. Nit: I didn't name any particular world. I didn't have a particular one in mind, especially since it's quite difficu...
QM doesn't have a reduction postulate, but some of the interpretations do. Each seems to spin the role of measurement a different way. Yes, the latter...
Sure, but in a mind-independent view, you bringing it to mind has zero effect on the thing itself. It's ontology in particular is not a function of so...
It's still a world. Nothing names it that, lacking information processing to give meaning, but that property (worldness) seems to be an example a feat...
This is the part I missed all this time, that the proof structure was there to prove that quantum theory is correct if these experiments could be veri...
No, I'm not also saying that. It absolutely does apply. The justification given for its nonexistence gates whether the chosen stance is valid or not. ...
Does asking that help nail down a mind-independent reality? Perhaps the answer to that question does. Maybe there are, but they'd still have to confor...
Yes, that's an ontological claim, and of mind-independence. That part is easy, and quite common. The challenge is with where it ends. Pick something t...
Comments