Le 08-juin-05, à 14:18, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :

Jonathan Colvin writes:

That raises an interesting question. *Should* we (whether reasoned on an ethical basis or a purely selfish one) care more about a copy of ourselves
getting hurt than a complete stranger?

I have little doubt that I *would* rather a stranger get stuck than my copy, but only, I think, because I would have more empathy for my copy than for a
stranger, in the same way that I would have more empathy for my mother
getting stuck than I would for someone I don't know.

Beyond the empathetic rationale, I don't see any convincing argument for
favoring the copy over a stranger. The copy is not, after all, *me*
(although it once was). We ceased being the same person the moment we were
copied and started diverging.

Yes, this is exactly my position, except that I'm not sure I would necessarily care more about what happens to my copy than to a stranger. After all, he knows all my secrets, my bank account details, my passwords... it's not difficult to see how we might become bitter enemies.

The situation is different when I am considering my copies in the future. If I know that tomorrow I will split into two copies, one of whom will be tortured, I am worried, because that means there is 1/2 chance that I will "become" the torture victim. When tomorrow comes and I am not the torture victim, I am relieved, because now I can feel sorry for my suffering copy as I might feel sorry for a stranger. You could argue that there is an inconsistency here: today I identify with the tortured copy, tomorrow I don't. But whether it is inconsistent or irrational is beside the point: this is how our minds actually work. Every amputee who experiences phantom limb pain is aware that they are being "irrational" because there is no limb there in reality, but knowing this does not make the pain go away.

This shows that you (Stathis) and Jonathan accept the first three steps of the Universal Dovetailer Argument (UDA). It remains just 5 steps to understand the reversal, both ontological and epistemological, between physics and computer science/number theory.
May be you could print the unique pdf slide for help:

And you can find the explanation of the eight steps in the html document
or you can print the equivalent in pdf:

You see, it is not difficult. It looks you find the first three steps by yourself.
Hope you will succeed in convincing Lee. And some others ?

I am curious if you accept the fourth step.



Reply via email to