m.a. and Bruno: *"BETTER OUTCOME"???* better for whom? better than what? Judging human?
JohnM On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Le 05-déc.-08, à 14:26, M.A. a écrit : > > > Bruno, > > Is it possible that as all my copies strive towards better > > outcomes, the entire group advances? > > > Yes (assuming QM), thanks to the notion of normality made possible by > the QM statistics. Hopefully so with the comp hyp, but strictly > speaking this is not yet proved. > > > > > If the worst are always proportionately opposite to the best, and the > > best keep improving themselves, don't they pull the worst up with > > them? Just a hopeful thought. > > But with that notion of normality, the worst should not be > proportionately opposite to the best. If you decide to improve > yourself, all your "you" will improve, except the unlucky one who will > get some "white rabbits" on their way. > > Here, both comp and QM, is like classical statistic, and roughly > speaking you can expect all outcomes to be possible, but with *highly* > different proportion. If you decide to do a cup of coffee, in almost > all histories you will drink coffee, they will be just a "little > infinity" or little measure of worlds where the coffee will taste like > tea, or where the boiling water will freeze. > > I tend to think that the ethics behind QM and comp are the same usual > ethics of the non eliminativist materialist, except that with comp, > such ethics can be grounded on a sort of general "modesty" principle. > (They will be opportunity to come back on that modesty issue). > > A priori, the comp theory of Good/Bad is NOT like in Plotinus theory. > Plotinus believed that if someone do something BAD, the same amount of > BAD will occur to him, soon or later. He gives a curious example which > is no doubt a bit shocking to our ears: he says that if a man rapes a > woman then ... he will be reincarnated into a woman and be raped by a > man! I think there is something true in that comment, but not if taken > literally. With comp, I can speculate on common laws for heat, love and > money: they could obey to similar global conservation principle > together with local creation rule. But frankly this *is* speculation, > and the main ethics will remain "respect the others and yourself" or > things like that. > > Bruno > > > > > > > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Bruno Marchal > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 3:44 AM > >> Subject: Re: Consciousness and free will > >> > >> > >> On 04 Dec 2008, at 00:29, M.A. wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> Hi Bruno, > >>> I'm quoting your response to an older post because I > >>> have a residual question. If "I" improve my ability to select the > >>> best future outcomes, don't "I" also choose the worst ones according > >>> to MWI and the rule of sum-over-histories? I seem to be competing > >>> against myself. M.A. > >> > >> Assuming just Everett QM, there is a notion of normality and > >> classicality which can be derived from the quantum evolution. This is > >> expalined by david Deutsch, but also the "decoherence theory". So, > >> when you take a (classical) decision you will act accordingly in the > >> vast majority of your histories, and very few version of you will > >> accidentally be doing the opposite. > >> Taking into account the comp. Hyp. such "decoherence" has to be > >> refined a priori, and this leads to a gallery of open problems. > >> Both with QM without collapse, and with comp, such normality is hard > >> to justified from the first person views when we are "near death". > >> This leads to even more complex questions. I can only say that I > >> don't know what happens, but I do expect, some probable "jump", > >> guided by some theoretical computer science intuition. Some > >> backtracking of experience, and renormalization of probabilities > >> could also occur. > >> Many-histories is not "all histories", or it is "all histories" but > >> with different relative weight. We can't use MW for escaping our > >> "responsibilities", I think. > >> > >> > >> Bruno > >> > >>> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> At some point I could "defined" consciousness as the state of > >>>>>>> (instinctively at first) betting on a history. This will speed > >>>>>>> up yourself relatively to your current stories, and make greater > >>>>>>> the set of your possible continuation. As an exemple you become > >>>>>>> aware an asteroïd is coming nearby make it possible for you to > >>>>>>> envisage a set of possible decisions, which can themselves > >>>>>>> augment your probability of survival. > >>>>>>> - > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ > >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. > >>>>> To post to this group, send email > >>>>> to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email > >>>>> to [EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>>>> For more options, visit this group > >>>>> at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en > >>>>> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
