[currymj]

this paper makes a lot of modest, carefully hedged, and reasonable claims.

in its tone however it's written as if it's a brutal takedown of... somebody's perspective. It's hard to tell whose or what perspective exactly. Maybe I'm just misreading the writing style.

(Personally, I think the general case here is one of the better objections to computationalism about consciousness. You can make it even more absurd.

There exists some isomorphism between the velocities of the molecules in a glass of water, and the states of a Turing machine simulating a human mind. So is the glass of water conscious? Actually there are many such isomorphisms to many possible conscious minds, so is every glass of water simultaneously having every possible conscious experience?)

[slopinthebag]

> There exists some isomorphism between the velocities of the molecules in a glass of water, and the states of a Turing machine simulating a human mind. So is the glass of water conscious?

Could you explain this in more detail? Not being argumentative, I want to understand this argument because I've made similar ones, although less crazy sounding.

[currymj]

the ideas have been worked out by people more sophisticated than me, good encyclopedia article on the topic:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/computation-physicalsyste...