= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Technoguyrob comments on Timeless Control - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (66)
At some point in the future a SI could come a long and explain all those observations in terms of atoms etc and your "control" etc would go poof becoming epiphenomenal.
I repeat: There is a difference between explaining something, and explaining it away.
You can explain a rainbow in terms of optics, but that doesn't make it an epiphenomenon. The haunted mine has been emptied of gnomes, but the rainbow is still there.
For goodness sakes, I just covered all this territory a couple of months ago. Consider rereading the Reductionism sequence.
So you are saying that explaining something is equivalent to constructing a map that bridges an inferential distance, whereas explaining something away is refactoring thought-space to remove an unnecessary gerrymandering?