Re: virus: the universe

Robin Faichney (robin@faichney.demon.co.uk)
Wed, 19 May 1999 12:25:22 +0100

In message <199904190705a5047@?>, psypher <overload@fastmail.ca> writes
>
>> Isn't significance subjective?
>
>...possibly, not necessarily. It is contextual though. But given that
>decisions are made by subjects and significance relates to the
>process of making decisions the concept is [recursively speaking]
>significant.

You're saying significance is significant? Isn't that circular? Or is that what "[recursively speaking]" is supposed to cover? I don't see how this connects with the concepts of subjective and objective information.

>>
>>>The universe as such
>>>cannot saud to "consist" of anything, it is not composed of parts.
>> It >IS.
>>
>> If it is not composed of parts, how can anything be of greater
>> significance than anything else?
>
>...the universe AS SUCH is not composed of parts. The universe
>experienced by any particular consciousness is composed of parts.

How can there be a "particular consciousness" in an undivided universe?

>...Consciousness is a pattern which has become self-aware. Self
>awareness results in an intuituion of separation. But "self" is an
>illusion.

How does a pattern "become self-aware"? 

-- 
Robin Faichney
Visit The Conscious Machine at
http://www.conscious-machine.com