On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> > >> > >> Abandon the assumption that "he" will have a unique successor because >> it's just not true anymore. > > > > > Right, from the third person points of view that he can have about > himself, or better himselves. > No idea what that means, none whatsoever. > >> > >> Stop using personal pronouns, all of them, because they only create >> ambiguity and confusion. English and all languages will need major >> revisions after such machines are invented, particularly in regard to >> personal pronouns. > > > > > The problem is a problem of possible first person outcomes > Yes, first person outcome*s*. That's plural. > > > We could ask a guy to do the experience, without giving him the protocols. > You need more than a fancy word like " protocols " to make a experiment or even a thought experiment scientific, you've got to be able to explain what the referent is for all the pronouns used. And you haven't because you can't. > By definition of the first person experiences (cointent of the personal > diary), > What does coincident with the diary mean exactly? I assume it mean coincident with first writing it, but that happened in the past and the though experiment involves people in the future. > > In fact, we did abandon the use of I and he, to make precise if we are > talking of the 1-I and 3-I, distinguishes by their diary contents. > After all these years I still haven't the foggiest idea what the hell 1-1 and 3-1 mean. All I know it that BOTH M and W have 1-p experiences and neither M nor W has the experience of writing in that diary because that happen yesterday not today, and it happened in a city that neither M nor W are in. So why do you keep talking about that stupid diary? > > Amoebas duplicate all the time Yes, and if amoebas had language the way they would use personal pronouns would be very different from the way we use them; but amoebas don't have language so they don't have to worry about it. But we do. > > > If you think the W-JC and the M-JC is the same guy, > NO, NO, NO! W-JC is H-JC and M-JC is H-JC but W-JC is *NOT* M-JC. A tomato is red and a fire engine is red but a tomato is not a fire engine. > > >>> >> >>> So the guy right now in Helsinki can predict with certainty that he >>> >>> will [...] >> >> > >> >> >> That is exactly the problem, who is this "the guy that will" >> f >> ellow? I don't know but he's certainly not t >> he guy right now in Helsinki > > > > > Of course he is the guy in Helsinki. Not right now, because time has > passed of course, > Of course time has passed, so he's certainly not the guy right now in Helsinki . So how does that diary you keep talking about enlighten things? > > > we have agreed that the guy survives (one en entire) in both places. > Yes, and both have 1p experiences. > > > Both can say: I was in Helsinki, and now I am in this precise city. > Yes, and both have a equally valid claim of being that guy. > > Surviving applies to person. It makes no sense to ask a doctor to survive > in exactly the same state and time lived before the operation. > What does survive in the same time before the operation even mean? And if you stay in the same state after the operation then you can't form new memories and there is a word for that, "dead". > > >>> >> >>> (whoever he can become in that experience) will see only one city. >> >> > >> >> >> "He" >> has a name, USE IT. >> > > > Than changes nothing. > It would put a end to this debate, that would be something. > > > See my older posts, > All your older posts have wall to wall personal pronouns and ridiculous stuff like 3-1 view. I have once given you a complete version of the argument without pronouns. > Is that the post about THE 1p experience as if there were only one when clearly there were two, or the one about the 1-3-1 experience? >> >> >> No NO *NO*! It's NOT 3p duplication, it's a 1p duplication; > > > > > No, that is logically impossible. > Then show me a logical contradiction that results from that; I already know it would result in weirdness but that's not good enough. > > You can only mean 3-1p duplication. > I'll tell you exactly what I mean, BOTH W and M have equally valid 1-p experiences and BOTH remember being H. Now it's your turn, who exactly is the 1-p in a 3-1p experience? > > > If there were a 1p-duplication, the diary would contain "Now I have the > feeling to see simultaneously the city of W and the city of M". > I'm looking at the diary right now and it says "I was the guy at H yesterday and now it is February 7 2017 at 1900 GMT and I see W" and "I was the guy at H yesterday and now It is February 7 2017 at 1900 GMT and I see M". And please don't tell me I'm confused because one was 1p and the other 3p, or 3-1p whatever that's supposed to be. >> >> Computationalism says that matter can duplicate EVERYTHING if it is >> organized in the correct way, and that includes 1p. > > > > > That is your confusion between 1p and 3-1p. > I'm so confused I don't even know if I'm confused because I don't know what 3-1p means. And you don't either. > > > By definition of 1p, the content of the diary, > T he content of the diary is the definition of 1p? I think you might want to try that again. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
