In particular his analogy of a calculator (for a computational view of the self) is great.
"The point is to realize that both The Physics Explanation and The Math Explanation are true, and in _fact the entire purpose of the calculator is to make them coincide_."
This points directly at the source of the horror that I've expressed in the other thread.
The only way that I am anchored in this world is via this body. And all kinds of random (or non-random) things can break the coincidence between computational me, and the physical process implementing it.
The physical process can be subverted to be something other than me.
...which is a little like being replaced by a pod-person / body snatcher.
Creepy.
h/t to @RobTheReticent for bringing the post to my attention.
Being physically implemented, all change has to be physically implemented.
But some change is the result of the system taking inputs, responding to them, reflecting on itself, and changing the way that it operates, often it quite radical ways.
Does anyone else find being an embedded / naturalistic agent disturbing?
Like, I could be injected with a chemical that would cause my cells to make new proteins, which could alter my brain.
It could change the algorithm that this body is running.
Which, from a computational theory of identity, is to say that you could inject me with a chemical that would delete ME, and replace me with someone else.
That's horrifying. It feels like one of the things that "shouldn't be allowed".