From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!socs.uts.edu.au!yak!rshelswe Fri Oct 30 15:17:43 EST 1992
Article 7402 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!socs.uts.edu.au!yak!rshelswe
>From: rshelswe@socs.uts.edu.au (Ryan Shelswell)
Subject: Re: We've Been Tricked- consciousness
Message-ID: <rshelswe.720074062@yak>
Sender: news@socs.uts.edu.au
Reply-To: rshelswe@socs.uts.edu.au
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney
References: <iordonez.719617253@academ01> <BwGKG0.M6@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <nijmanm.719672415@hpas7> <BwHA6K.D33@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <nijmanm.719758335@hpas7>
Date: 26 Oct 92 04:34:22 GMT
Lines: 26

nijmanm@prl.philips.nl (M.J. Nijman) writes:

 >lcarr@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (lincoln carr) writes:
 >
 >>Also, if the worlds were
 >>noninteracting, how could a being exist in one and perceive in the
 >>other?  Isn't perception itself an interaction?
 >
 >It doesn't have to be. While in W1 you could oberve W2 without interacting
 >with it. Just like you can observe the set of prime numbers without
 >effecting the set.
 >

Not quite the same.  You are _imagining_ the set of prime numbers,
in your mind, ie. your mind is interactiong with itself (which,
BTW implies self awareness) - everyone probably perceives prime
numbers quite differently (many commonalities, but the shades of
meaning would differ, and paths of associations would be different).

There is a set of thought which says exactly that you _can't_ observe
without interaction... and they have proved some rather 
valid points with it... (Although I'm not Certain of that :^)

--
   - Ryan Shelswell -    |     "A real hacker is someone who knows
rshelswe@socs.uts.edu.au |      what the CBS Opening was..."


