>H indistinguishability

[David Cary <d.cary@ieee.org>]

Transhuman Mailing List


Your point that "magic" is a constantly-receding horizon is a interesting
perspective. I think we can draw analogies to AI research -- there,
"intelligence" seems to be a constantly-receding horizon. I have played
checkers against a robot. I imagine that people who grew up in a lower-tech
civilization would think that that robot was "intelligent"; people who grew
up in a even lower-tech civilization would think that that robot was also
"alive".

On the other hand, some other famous individual said
"A difference that makes no difference is no difference."
(-- who ?)

When I can do things that cannot be distinguished from (written
descriptions of) magical activities, then (from the point of view of that
author) I am doing (the author's definition of) "magic".

I think this "no difference" theorem is the basis for the realization that
there is no such thing as the "life force", and for most arguments that the
soul and spirit is purely physical -- if it is impossible, even in theory,
to distinguish between a entity driven by "life force" (or soul or spirit)
vs. a entity driven purely by physical forces, then the "no difference"
theorem claims these 2 entities are really the same.

Hmm... combining the "no difference" theorem and Clarke's law, I get the
conclusion that even if some people think that one is doing magic, that
person always believes it is not "real" magic. I know this is true of stage
magicians. Is it always true ? Even for God Himself ?

I almost wish we had some Wiccans on this list, so they could answer that
question. And also so they could annoy Jeff Dee and "Illuminatus Maximus"
:-P.

>From: jeff@illusionmachines.com (Jeff Dee)
>Subject: Re: >H the dreaded religion debate
...
>Allen Smith wrote:
...
>> We do come here into Clarke's definition of magic, namely any
>> sufficiently advanced technology. The dividing line between magic and
>> the divine supernatural is a rather fine one.
>
>Clarke did not say that sufficiently advanced
>technology *was* magic - he only said it was
>indistinguishable from magic. That's not quite
>the same thing. You have to ask yourself, how
>advanced is "sufficiently" advanced? It seems
>to me that this depends on the viewer. Primitive
>tribesmen may think that an airplane is magical
>(or a god), but *only* because their own level
>of technology is so low. Having some crusty old
>Greek philosopher call a posthuman a god does
>not make that posthuman "supernatural" - it
>*only* demonstrates the guy's ignorance.
...
>-Jeff Dee
...
>illusionmachines.com/personal/jeff/index.html

--
+ David Cary "mailto:d.cary@ieee.org" "http://www.ionet.net/~caryd_osu/david"
| Future Tech, Unknowns, PCMCIA, digital hologram, <*> O-


***************************************************************************
* If you need to unsubscribe, send email saying "unsubscribe transhuman"  *
* to majordomo@logrus.org, without the quotes, from the SAME email address*
* as the one you subscribed under! Yes, it is case-sensitive. Don't blame *
* the admin for your spelling errors.                                     *
*                  Please email all technical problems to                 *
*               owner-transhuman@logrus.org, NOT to the list.             *
***************************************************************************