Re: On the subjective experience of consciousness

From: Thomas Buckner (
Date: Sun Apr 04 2004 - 18:14:52 MDT

--- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <>
> Ben Goertzel wrote:
> >
> > So, following up my previous comment: the
> so-called 'paradox' is not
> > really a puzzling aspect of the universe, rather
> it's an indication that
> > two useful vocabularies we've developed for
> talking about the world
> >
> > * physics
> > * introspective folk psychology
> >
> > are apparently "incommensurable" (in the sense of
> philosophy of science
> > -- meaning there is no reasonably straightforward
> way to translate
> > between their vocabularies)
> Physics wins.
> Physics always wins.

I'm about halfway writing a much longer post, but in
part it says: paradox (I am convinced) is always an
indication that the wrong question is being asked or
levels are being confused.
Example: paradoxical drawings of 'impossible' objects.
Really it's just 2D lines on paper being interpreted
by the eye/brain according to rules of 3D spaces.
Our minds are like emulations running several levels
above physics, and the rules are different for each
level (which is how we know there are different
levels). Physics runs under chemistry runs under
biochem runs under biology runs under neurology runs
under psychology (one may disagree exactly where to
separate some levels, but separations do exist).
The phenomenon of lucid dreaming (it's real, and it's
amazing) proves that much of what we think is real is
all in our heads. There may be a correspondent
external reality, but our dreams, thoughts, emotions,
sensations are all running in the emulation.
The emulation, examining itself, shies away from the
idea that it can all work without any sprinkling of
magic soul dust, but it works anyway.


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:46 MDT