(900×900)^900 — fishfry

what scenes are not included within the total number of all the pictures — Zelebg

and yet the number of those pictures is not infinite. — Zelebg

Searle used the Chinese room to argue that there was more to meaning than could be captured by mere semantics. — Banno

I wish I could locate the youtube footage of Searle's wry account of early replies to his vivid demonstration (the chinese room) that so-called "cognitive scripts" mistook syntax for semantics. Something like, "so they said, ok we'll program the semantics into it too, but of course what they came back with was just more syntax". — bongo fury

I'll put my money on those who read the paper. — Banno

What is daft is to claim that Hume needs to justify his habits when he's just said there is no justification for them. — unenlightened

... the awkward conclusion that the greatest of modern philosophers completely missed the point of his own problem... — Goodman: Fact Fiction and Forecast, p61

Neither would it carry any Imputation of Falshood to our simple Ideas, if by the different Structure of our Organs, it were so ordered, That the same Object should produce in several Men’s Minds different Ideas at the same time; v.g. if the Idea, that a Violet produced in one Man’s Mind by his Eyes, were the same that a Marigold produces in another Man’s, and vice versâ. — Locke: Of True and False Ideas

so no, it's [not, Shirley?] a problem for physicalists — Kenosha Kid

Even the mathematical symbols that express these inexorable physical laws seem to be entirely free of these same laws. — Howard Pattee

That which is isomorphic with a natural number. — hypericin

your copy is one of 5 million extant in the world, each qualitatively (at least microscopically) and numerically distinct from all the others. — hypericin

We are not referring to the physical mediums when speaking of informational objects. — hypericin

We are referring to the information itself. — hypericin

So, if you watched a copy of the movie dubbed in Spanish, or maybe even a stage production, you might say you watched "A Wizard of Oz". — hypericin

But, there are not as many "Wizard of Oz"es as there are copies of the movie floating around. — hypericin

If you accept this, then it logically follows that two copies of the dvd contain the same, numerically identical, information. — hypericin

This is not some esoteric, woo belief, — hypericin

the numbers "13, 13" as they appear on your screen — hypericin

Are they two different numbers, both classifed as "13"? Or the same number? — hypericin

I claim that with information qualitative identity *is* numeric identity. As in the example of "13, 13". — hypericin

Just consider the numbers "13, 13" as they appear on your screen. Are they two different numbers, both classifed as "13"? Or the same number? — hypericin

Are we talking about tokens of a numeral (or numeral string)? Or are we talking about some abstract number or concrete collection, but either way something (or some things) referred to by such a numeral? Or would that be a pedantic question? — bongo fury

No more "woo" [than] to say that two numbers, i.e. "13, 13", are the same number. Two different things, classified as "13"? Sounds woo to me. — hypericin

And consider that, in binary form, the movie is a single (beyond-cosmically large) number. — hypericin

Two spatially distinct objects cannot be numerically identical, — hypericin

only qualitatively similar (even qualitative identity cannot be established). — hypericin

words [...] do not and cannot point to the true nature of things. Rather they carve the world into sets. — hypericin

Two spatially distinct informational "objects" may be numerically the same object. — hypericin

my woo claim — hypericin

Such events of the first sort [plays or screenings] are where information interacts with, and drives, the physical, material world. — hypericin

But consider that the light and sound is the same information as that in the reel or disc, just in another physical medium, and spread across time. — hypericin

An authentic copy of "the wizard of oz" is the very same "wizard of oz". — hypericin

Using my own words against me? — hypericin

the information content of the movie on dvd, and on hard disc, is identical, bit by bit, in spite of the total dissimilarity of the physical medium. — hypericin

In a sense, the information is not just the same, but it is the same informational "thing" residing in two places simultaneously. — hypericin

This is in contrast to physical objects, — hypericin

where this assertion of identity simply cannot happen. At best you can say that two things are very similar. — hypericin

In order to reconcile mind and brain, one must first reconcile information and matter. — hypericin

Between the non-living and the living there also seems to be an infinite gap. Panpsychism is a modern vitalism. — hypericin

Why should I favor "the physical world is mental, and only appears physical" over "the mental world is physical, and only appears mental"? — hypericin

This misunderstands words, they do not and cannot point to the true nature of things. Rather they carve the world into sets. — hypericin

Everything that can be explained about life can be explained without reference to "elan vital". The same will likely prove true of consciousness. — hypericin

Matter/information is the real dualism, — hypericin

"The wizard of Oz" is the same movie, whether it is stored on a film reel, a dvd, a magnetic tape, a hard drive, or an eidetic brain's memory: all completely different physical media. — hypericin

carve [those (or adjacent) bits of the] world into [the same] set[...]. — hypericin

it's hard to make sense of the idea of experience arising out of a combination of non-conscious stuff. — Manuel

it's hard to make sense of the idea of consciousness arising out of a combination of non-experiential stuff.

it's hard to make sense of the idea of experience arising out of a combination of non-experiential stuff.

it's hard to make sense of the idea of consciousness arising out of a combination of non-conscious stuff.

does consciousness always only occur, — charles ferraro

or exist, — charles ferraro

the whole is equal to the sum of the parts plus the interaction between these parts - a separate “additive” meta-physical process. — Benj96

A thing is a higher level construction. — Joshs

Are information processors, generators and experiencers also myths? — Marchesk

1. How does matter relate to information? — hypericin

2. How does information relate to mind? — hypericin

Translation of talk about nothing into talk about something often takes some trouble... — Nelson Goodman: Sights Unseen

an answer, which is "overcoming differences of perspective". So it's useful, because it succinctly forestalls the unnecessary baggage of "subjective" and "objective". — bongo fury

We don't study ghosts, Gods or angels... — Manuel

property dualism [...] substance dualism — Manuel

I think one of the problems we tend to have when trying to understand experience, is that our intuition tells us that most things are non-experiential. We see rocks, rivers, land, the sky, tables and so forth and even (some) planets to be solid objects.

It's a powerful intuition.

Then we have this thing, this simultaneously abstract and concrete aspect to us, experience, which appears to be completely different from "solid" rocks and rivers. But... — Manuel

Are some circular arguments reasonable? — forrest-sounds

and is this an example of one? — forrest-sounds

Here is a consciousness.

habit/custom — bongo fury