I was familiar with the wisdom in earlier chapters (through David's interviews) , but this chapter surprised me. That abstractions are equally real as physical stuff. The Hofstadter example is very helpful.
Glad to see another BOI video. This one was great. It gave me a better understanding of this chapter and I realized I was missing a bit of what Deutsch means about abstractions.
KS 445599 No. The physical stuff exists *prior* to computationalism. We get “it” from “qubit”. But qubits are physical. “It” is something higher order. See here: pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e61b/fbc6a38778e1b83088b124a97f2e5009b464.pdf
All of your videos have irrevocably changed my thinking about this world 🙌🏻 a deep thanks Brett hall !
You’re like my uni. lecturer, except that I actually pay attention to every single word you speak say
Thank you Brett, lovely video.
Fantastic book, and great exposition. I am finding these videos really helpful.
I was familiar with the wisdom in earlier chapters (through David's interviews) , but this chapter surprised me. That abstractions are equally real as physical stuff. The Hofstadter example is very helpful.
Glad to see another BOI video. This one was great. It gave me a better understanding of this chapter and I realized I was missing a bit of what Deutsch means about abstractions.
Thank you for your work. Naval sent me here!
Great choice of locale (the Gaudi building) and nice use of it!
This is like Bible study 2.0
Excellent video
spot on this video is ...
Is the reality of abstractions another way of referring to pancomputationalism? They sound very similar.
KS 445599 No. The physical stuff exists *prior* to computationalism. We get “it” from “qubit”. But qubits are physical. “It” is something higher order. See here: pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e61b/fbc6a38778e1b83088b124a97f2e5009b464.pdf
I found the domino computer story informitive.