George Levy said: > >>First person observation of consciousness is the self observing the self, or >>possibly part of the self observing other parts of the self. > >Let me add to this previous post the following, which is relevant in the >context >of the MWI. > >Any object can be viewed from the first person or from the third person >perspective. Let me explain. > >If the object does not exert any contingency on the existence of the >observer, then >the first and third person perspectives coincide. > >If the object does have a contingency on the existence of the observer, >then the >first and third person perspectives diverge. For example, let's say that >the object >is a randomly detonated bomb. If the bomb is located under your seat, >then it has >a contingency on your continued existence and therefore your observation >will be >first person: you will not see the bomb explode. If on the other hand, the >bomb is >located far away, then your observation will be third person and you might >see it >explode. > >It also follows that different observers in different contingency frames of >reference experience different first person observations of the same object. > >Following this reasonning we could surmise that even some of the natural laws >themselves as well as the absence of white rabbits could be first person >effects. >Any violation to those laws and the appearance of white rabbits would >imply the >immediate disappearance of the observer. For example any change to the >charge/mass >of electrons would be "global" and result in the immediate destruction of >the world >as we know it. Therefore the stability of the electron could be a first >person >effect.
I agree, basically. The problem is that the appearance of a white rabbits does not imply the immediate disappearance of the observer, because there is nothing inconsistent with white rabbits or flying pigs. For exemple if you see a white rabbits in a dream, not only you don't disappear but you find that completely normal (unless you are a lucid dreamer trained in noticing inconsistencies). I agree, though, that the stability of the electron is a first person effect, even a first person plural one (hopefully). But the hunting of the white rabbits is not terminated and we must still explain, a la Feynman, why the so many consistent but weird dreams done by the UD "interfere destructively". Your explanation would work if the comp-substitution-level was necessarily electronic, which I doubt. Bruno
