I really enjoyed Tom's videos and book (the parts I have had time to read), so this is not a rant but more of a nitty criticism. My criticism stems mostly from his treatment of consciousness in the context of a computer or information analogy. There are many subtle philosophical problems in consciousness that seem to have no parallel to anything else known, especially anything in the physical world. Strict materialists or physicalists will of course disagree (I am not one of those). But the following are some examples of the kind of things I mean. How can they be explained in a computer or information model?

1. Subjective experience cannot be observed as a property of any physical or information system in the universe, except your own body. In physics, if something cannot be observed or physically inferred in any way, it cannot be said to exist. Hence guys like Dennet et al. But how can it be that subjective thoughts do not exist, and yet the things they refer to, including the material or informational, do exist? (Some might suggest that if subjectivity is observed, but not as a property of any physical system, then maybe physical or information systems are property of it).

2. Why is reality being experienced from the perspective of your body instead of another body elsewhere in this vast universe or another universe or reality frame? Why not everyone else's? Why not no one? (this is also known as the childhood why-am-I-me question). What's so special about your collection of atoms? In physics, there are no preferred locations or times, so why is your location (here) and time (now) so obviously preferred? That is simply what is being observed. A contradiction.

3. Everything you think you know - all the science, math, philosophy, religion, spirituality, art, culture, etc - none of it has ever actually been separated from your existence, perspective, and experience. Can there be any kind of knowledge or information without a knower? An epistemic problem.

4. We do not actually live in a physical or information world. We live in a personal mental world, and the physical is inferred or assumed.

5. Cause and effect. What does it mean for something to cause something else? How does it differ from 100% correlation? In science, some relationships and event types have been found to be generally consistent and highly correlated. But no claims can be made empirically for any ultimate causation. These correlations seem very useful at lower material levels of meaning, but much less useful in predicting and explaining the higher level circumstances and conditions of one's life.

Jeff,

This is going to take a lot of time to respond to, I'm afraid.

1) You need to read more and understand something more of how Tom describes reality than you do at present. This is described as a Virtual Reality in that it represents, is created by, a data stream that comes into our minds. All that really exists is our minds, which are part of the greater reality of Consciousness Space, and those data streams (and there are many available) that come into our minds to generate our experience of being here in this 'physical' reality. Physics needs to understand this new perspective and there are many physicists who are working towards this new paradigm. Since what we perceive as this reality is actually our experience and interpretation of a data stream, our perception is subjective. This has nothing to do with the usual interpretation of physics.

2) Again, the answer is relatively simple if you understand more of Tom's model of reality. As you experience this reality as described under 1, keep in mind that you are who you are because the part of the Consciousness System that generates the data stream for your perception, which we call The Big Computer, personalizes it, the data stream, for you and sends it to you to provide the specific point of view and perceptions that are yours. TBC does make mistakes, produces glitches, but it is pretty damn good at sending you your own data and no one elses.

3) In a sense you are right and there is nothing known that is not know by some being, a conscious entity. But in a large sense there are a great many more conscious entities than you are aware of and a lot more environments within which Virtual Realities they exist than you are aware of. Much of what you know as philosophy and etc. is inherent to this particular VR and is not relevant elsewhere or know or cared about elsewhere. Likewise, there is much knowledge elsewhere that is not within our awareness here. The whole simulation is however stored as to its important points in past data bases managed by TBC so things are not really lost. Both TBC and the past data base exists within the CS where things are not lost or destroyed if of value. It's not like the Alexandria Library that was destroyed and much knowledge lost.

4) We live within our minds as a digital, individualized consciousness, an IUOC or Individual Unit of Consciousness as we call it. We as all the IUOCs that exist in all of CS also exist interacting, intercommunicating and inter linked as the One Consciousness. Tom describes all of the sequence of development to reach this state in his books at a relatively low level and full of descriptive side trips to explain it to those who do not have the science and information system background that might be needed for it to be clear.

5) Cause and effect are part of how the rule set that defines this reality works, how it is designed to appear. The actuality of cause and effect can be better understood if you come to understand what is written above.

Hopefully you can find some value in the above. Ask for clarification of what is not clear.

Ted

Hi jeffw welcome to Tom's MBT discussion "Negative Opinion" forum. Ted has given you a lot to ponder but first things first let's get what "Consciousness" MEANS when Tom talks of it and that is it, Consciousness means a nonphysical digital information system we are all tiny bits of. Welcome again.'
Love to you and yours,
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Ted,

Thanks very much for your response. I have since watched a few more of Tom's videos so hopefully I can speak more intelligently on it, although I doubt I understand them as well as you. I address some of your responses below:

1). If all that really exists is our minds, then the concept of a greater reality of Consciousness Space is also only in our minds. To postulate a greater reality as a superset of mind makes that greater reality objective, even though it may not exist in the physical sense that we are accustomed to. The problem then is: how do you interface a subjective system with an objective system? If everything is subjective (including the existence of other minds, greater realities, etc), then we're headed towards some brand of solipsism.

2) But I am not even considering that I have a different or unique data stream. I observe that reality is being experienced from "my" perspective instead of someone elses, everyone elses, or no ones at all. The fact that I may have a different or unique data stream does not explain why reality is being experienced from my perspective instead of someone elses.

3, 4) Ok I can accept that point of view, and the concept of a simulation is very intriguing (video lag, constant speed of light, etc). But again, then we are postulating an objective reality outside the mind, even though it is not is same as our PMR reality. The problem then becomes how the interface between objective and subjective occurs.

Jeff,

All of this is explained succinctly in the model as written up on the Wiki: http://wiki.my-big-toe.com/index.php/In ... _MBT_Model It is not complete in several senses as explained several times. But it is a 'tighter', more compact layout of the concepts than Tom was able to put into a beginners level book.

Everything is explained in detail there. Yes, the CS is objective in the sense that it is constant, does not change arbitrarily or randomly, and the state at each delta t is directly derivable, if you know the rule set, backwards and forwards delta t by delta t. The concept of meta realities is explained and this is how you get from the objective to the subjective, from fixed functioning like a Cellular Automaton to free will and consciousness. This happens first to create the consciousness of AUO which over 'time' transmutes into AUM. Then AUO invents NPMR type VRs to provide consciousness to each of us as an IUOC individually. Then AUM eventually creates so vastly many NPMRs and also the PMR type VRs where the intensity of interaction and feedback makes for more rapid development, lowering of entropy and improved Quality of Consciousness.

Ted