"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: quiet
My main problem with UTOR is this: consciousness isn't a program, it's a running program. If you think it's just a program, then you've got to give some exposition of what the running program would be - and I don't see how you can do this. But if you think that it's a running program, then it necessarily cannot exist in the atemporal realm, because running implies temporality.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: Phellan
Mmm coming a bit late into this discussion I suppose, but picking up on the threads of the Temporal discussion.
Dave you've said that looking at the clock at 6:45 and 7:00, it would only appear to have a change in time, but in fact they both occured at the same time. . .loosely put. I can handle that.
However, the flaw I find in all of this dealing with the lack of time, is that if it all occurs simultaneously, then HOW can one percieve to make a decision based on prior experience? As that decision would be soley based upon the mind percieving the event at an earlier date--and thus even if they do occur at the same time, the mind has created the time frame by it's percieved differences. And thus that percieved difference is a change in and of itself--you can not consciously recollect a memory without there being a time frame. The mind imposes such a restriction.
Does that make sense? That the mere act of percieving the change in the clock itself--the act requires a conscious state change, even if the two events did both exist at the same time, the perception that they did not relegates them to exist in two frames of reference, and that frame of reference-- that one time occured before the other is a conscious representation of time, of change.
This is probably not as clear or concise as Quiet has been but I'll give it a shot anyways
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
Written by: quiet
Um. As far as I can tell, if you come up with such a theory, the burden of proof (or explanation) is in your court, not mine.
Written by: quiet
1. You started out [in UTOR] by comparing consciousness to a program, and using that analogy to motivate your claim that consciousness was (like a program) a 'non-temporal mathematical entity'.
2. But now it looks like the program analogy won't get off the ground; so the motivation behind the whole 'non-temporal mathematical' stuff has disappeared.
Written by: quiet
I'm not going to try to argue for the notion that the non-temporal mathematical realm can't ground consciousness, since that would take an awfully long time;
Written by: quiet
There's a deeper problem here, as well. You start with the question 'why is there something rather than nothing', and derive the conclusion that all minds are necessary entities. But, if that were true, then it would also be the case that ALL POSSIBLE MINDS exist. And that seems straightforwardly false. In answering the question 'why is there something rather than nothing', you raise the further question 'why is there THIS, rather than something else?'. UTOR doesn't allow any room to answer this question, since on UTOR there is not only THIS, but also EVERYTHING ELSE POSSIBLE. That includes consciousnesses which are pure evil, which are entirely composed of suffering, etc etc.
Written by: quiet
And, finally, UTOR leaves inexplicable the fact that all consciousnesses are located within physical entities; that physical changes affect these consciousnesses (for how on earth could a physical change, such as a blow to the head, or a psychedelic drug, impact on the 'timeless, unchanging mathematical realm'?).
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
Written by: i8beefy2
No, they aren't, because the physical world we are talking about is our perceptions of the physical world... That is all we ever experience, so from a strict Empiricist view you never have proof of a physical realm being there, just of similar experiences... but all of those experiences are necessary evolutions based on possibility. I think in essence, UToR must take an idealist approach with a universe that acts kinda like a Leibnizian one... Basically, all possible perceptions are coordinated to be similar based on the evolution of possiblity. In fact, not only our world, but every possible world must exist at the same time, eliminating the need to answer the "why does this specific world exist" question...
Umm... right Dave? This seems to follow based on what I've read here, or at least its how I see it.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
ture na sig
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
where there are ashes from those burnt by flame
the phoenix rises again and again.
Written by: SirEggo
what goes up comes down, what makes voice is capable of true voice or false voice, senses are common but all humans do not share a common sense or peace would not look at us from many seeing peaces.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
Written by: quiet
Just a second . . .
1. To deny that minds are attached to bodies just seems perverse, and would generally count as a demerit of any theory IMO.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: i8beefy2
Not so quiet. And in fact, I think that Dave's theory is necessarily idealistic actually... I mean otherwise he'd have to account for something physical (the world) coming from something that isnt (math). So the body problem is no more a problem than it is for any other idealist theory.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
Written by: quiet
Dave, you've missed the point of my question.
The question is: why is it that we (you, me, and everyone we talk to) all appear attached to bodies, but we never encounter any minds which don't appear attached to bodies?
Written by: quiet
Presumably you allow that one mindstate (e.g. mine) can interact with another (e.g. yours). So why are all of the interacting mindstates apparently embodies?
Written by: UToR webpage
solipsism- the view that you are the only thing in the world; other objects and, most disturbing, other people, are illusory.
Most attempts to employ the useful doctrine of scepticism, yet avoid the horror of solipsism, have, in my opinion, not been successful........
................And yet, it (UToR) denies solipsism, in fact it proves that solipsism logically, cannot be the case.
This is because all possible states of consciousness must necessarily be real. So, in the situation where I am speaking to you, looking into your eyes and communicating; I can know beyond any doubt whatsoever that, regardless of the fact that our physical bodies may not be real; that somewhere you are hearing my words, and that you are real.
As far as I am aware, no other philosophical theory of being so completely shatters the possibility of solipsism.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
Written by: quiet
you still haven't addressed the question: if you're going to claim that minds are attached to bodies, you have to give an account of why this should be so.
Written by: onewheeldave
UTOR does not need an explanation of why minds are attached to bodies, as it specifically denies that minds are attached to bodies.
According to UTOR, minds are logically and necessarily independant from the existence of any physical matter (including bodies).
If it were the case that no physical matter existed, then all currently existing, and, in fact, all possible minds, would nevertheless exist (and still be under the appearance that they existed in bodies).
------------------------
However, UOR does have an explantion as to why minds appear to wander round in bodies, and it goes as follows: -
Of all possible mindstates, some will be mindstates that are experiences of being in bodies and experiencing the appearance of physical matter through the appearance of physical sense organs (eyes/ears etc).
This is undeniable, of all possible mindstates, a certain subset will be experiences of being in bodies; if you have any doubt about this point then simply consider the set of mind states that make up your life. Obviously they must be possible, because they are actual.
Given that mindstates which involve experience of being in bodies are possible, and, in conjunction with UTORs other claim, that all possible mind states necessarily exist; we have the explanation of why some minds appear to be in bodies.
Written by: quiet
when you say 'all possible mind-states', do you mean 'all the ones that might appear in the world if we examined it (i.e. all of the sentient creatures on the world at the moment) or 'all of the minds that could possibly ever exist' (i.e. all of the possible sentient creatures)?
Written by: quiet
furthermore: if you're going to allow that some things (like rocks) can't have minds, then you are claiming that 'because there is nothing to instantiate it - no brain, ears, eyes, etc - there is no mind', and this directly contradicts the premisses of UTOR.
Written by: quiet
furthermore: if you're going to allow that
you're claiming both that the physical world does, and also does not, place restrictions on what exists in the mathematical realm. please clarify.
does the existence of minds, or does it not, depend on the physical world?
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
ture na sig
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
"Moo," said the happy cow.
Written by: quiet
quote: 'Given that mindstates which involve experience of being in bodies are possible, and, in conjunction with UTORs other claim, that all possible mind states necessarily exist; we have the explanation of why some minds appear to be in bodies. '
Right - but do we have any explanation of why no mind fails to appear to be in a body?
Written by: onewheeldave
So the answer to your question, is that there are mind-states that lack the appearance of being embodied.
monkeys ate my brain