Re: Simulation argument in the NY Times

From: Randall Randall (
Date: Sun Aug 19 2007 - 23:38:11 MDT

On Aug 19, 2007, at 10:13 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
> --- Randall Randall <> wrote:
>> On Aug 19, 2007, at 8:04 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
>>> I mean consciousness as that which distinguishes people from
>>> philosophical
>>> zombies.
>> But is there any reason to think that the concept of a
>> philosophical zombie makes any sense? In order for it
>> to make sense, you have to have found that consciousness
>> isn't a physical process. Do you believe you have
>> evidence for this view?
> I have none, yet I also believe that I am not a p-zombie. I
> realize these
> views are contradictory. I just leave it at that.

There is no contradiction between believing that
you are not a p-zombie and having no evidence to
suggest that p-zombies are possible. I'm not
sure if I'm not communicating well or if you are
reading what you expect to see. :)

Randall Randall <>
"This is a fascinating question, right up there with whether rocks
fall because of gravity or being dropped, and whether 3+5=5+3
because addition is commutative or because they both equal 8."
   - Scott Aaronson

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:58 MDT