[MD] LC Comments

[Magnus Berg]

Hi Dan

> Dan:
> Make it up as I go along? Come on. I thought you wanted to discuss the
> RMP annotations, Magnus. And here you are being a dick.

Am I? I don't know.

Imagine you got an old Egyptian stone tablet from a friend for your 50th 
birthday. It was really nice in a glass cage and he told you a long 
fascinating story about where it came from, who had used it and how it 
came to be in his possession.

You got so fired up by this artefact that you spent 2 years researching 
about the artefact before you finally decided to really go there and do 
some hands-on research on-site. And when you got back from the trip you 
spent another year writing a whole book about your artefact. To honour 
your friend who gave it to you, you let him proof read the book before 
sending it off to egyptologists for peer-review.

But your friend said:

- Hrmm.. well, Dan, this artefact I gave you, it wasn't really real. I 
actually just won it in Vegas. There are hundreds just like it. I made 
the story up on my way to your birthday party.

Exactly how would that feel?

Because it does feel pretty much the same to me when you say something 
like that. That the levels are not really real, doesn't reflect any 
reality "out there", etc.

So, perhaps I was being a dick. But I think the circumstances are pretty 
forgiving.



>>> I guess you're saying you feel RMP's annotation is overly simplistic
>>> and disrespectful. Okay. Point taken. I prefer short and elegant to
>>> long and windy but we all have our preferences.
>>
>> No, not just simplistic. Metaphysically irrelevant.
>
> Dan:
> Okay. How?

When I hear that patterns of higher levels must be *supported* by lower 
levels, I take that as meaning a direct dependency, not a 
circumstantial. That a computer's intellectual patterns are supported by 
a person *using* the computer, or having built it, is circumstantial, 
not direct. A direct dependency is for example that a living cell's 
biological patterns are supported by the inorganic molecules inside that 
cell. If the molecules are dissolved somehow, physically or chemically, 
the inorganic patterns are gone and then the biological patterns goes 
with it and the cell dies.


>> Do you now understand what I mean? Do you understand that a computer that
>> supports intellectual patterns must be supported by all lower levels at all
>> times, otherwise it doesn't work?
>
> Dan:
> No. No clue.

Just like the cell above. There must be a direct dependency.

	Magnus