On 7/24/06, David Hobby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
maru dubshinki wrote:
> I think having them cancel out would be a better idea. We could
> formalize each god as "really" being a infinite series of ethical
> axioms (covering every possible action), each of which says to do or
> do not a specific something; with an infinite number of gods, every
> possible binary string of axioms will be represented, but each one
> will cancel out (since if we have one god with YYYNNN...., we *know*
> there is another with NNNYYY....) with another god's string. I suspect
> we need not worry about one string "outvoting" another string, since
> subsets of the infinite-gods set could themselves be infinite?
Maru--
Yes, that's the kind of thing I was thinking of. Alberto
was talking about probability. Since all probabilities
sum to one, that might well imply that each god got
probability zero.
You seem to be looking at this in terms of voting. Maybe
you can make it work, but infinite elections do have
problems...
By the way, some of the ethical axioms would contradict
each other, so some of the possible strings would be
contradictory. I presume you'll stick with tradition,
and assign them all gods too? : )
---David
As well to count the angels Maru
"The Gods Must Be Crazy"?
~maru
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
