The human mind can be conceived of as a model/simulation of what-is. A property of the simulation might be “chair” “fun” or “self” etc. i.e. content. However, some aspects of this simulation, such as p-consciousness, are properties not of the simulation but rather what-is.
-
-
Replying to @Hutcheson @Plinz and
I believe that part of my mind's working includes using models of the world but to say my mind /is/ a model/simulation is a whole different thing. Why would I believe that?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisfcarroll @Hutcheson and
Well, there’s the premise that IF we will someday be capable of seamless reality simulation, then the statistical probability that we are already living in a simulation is very high. If you accept that initial premise, then the Simulation Hypothesis has a high degree of validity
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SimsYStuart @Hutcheson and
I'm not sure if that is what
@Hutcheson means by 'simulation', I think he's suggesting something else?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisfcarroll @SimsYStuart and
But the Simulation Hypothesis 1st assumes that 'I am a Turing Machine' is viable. If we locate consciousness in the Turing Machine per se, then we must say that a stack of printouts on a very long shelf is conscious, if it contains the full description of a TM and its history
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisfcarroll @SimsYStuart and
I'd rather say we should notice that a TM, like any other mechanical device, doesn't experience things. It just does things.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisfcarroll @SimsYStuart and
I think that is correct. A physical thing cannot experience anything. Only a simulation can. Physical things can implement simulations, however.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @SimsYStuart and
What does "experience" mean in "a simulation experiences something" ?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chrisfcarroll @SimsYStuart and
I think of experience as the way in which the content presents itself to the observer, while the observer is constituting itself over the act of observation.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz @SimsYStuart and
Can I replace the word 'observer' with 'homunculus' in that sentence :-?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
No!!! Think of the observer as constructed from the ground up, as the minimal system that can model that it is modeling itself and its relationship to its environment.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz @chrisfcarroll and0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.