Re: Autonomy?

```
On 29 Jun 2012, at 21:20, John Clark wrote:```
```
```
```On Fri, Jun 29, 2012  Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

```
> You said yourself that the first person cannot be defined. How could we verify that prediction? Except by feeling to be one of the W and M reconstituted person. And from their points of viex, the prediction of being in both place is simply refuted.
```
```
Refuted?? As I said before if you really had complete information then you could make 2 predictions:
```
```
1) I Bruno Marchal will write in my diary "I Bruno Marchal am now in Washington and only Washington".
```
```
2) I Bruno Marchal will write in my diary "I Bruno Marchal am now in Moscow and only Moscow".
```
```
Afterwards both diaries can be shown to anyone who is interested proving that there was no indeterminacy and the prediction is confirmed to be completely correct.
```
```
But from the 1-pov, we know in advance that those two prediction are incompatible. So you can make one more which is "1) OR 2)".
```

```
Things become paradoxical only if you make the assumption that there can only be one Bruno Marchal, therefore the assumption must be untrue.
```
```
Things become contradictory when you confuse 1 pov and 3 pov, leading to "1) and 2)" which is non sense. The assumption is not that there is only one Bruno Marchal, but that all those Bruno Marchal, whoever they are will still each feel to be only one of them. "Oh I am the one in Moscow, and not the one in Washington, and I was unable to predict that fact, unless using a "or".
```

```
```

```
> You have a machine with some button, and you are asked to make a prediction on the immediate personal outcome of a simple experiment.
```
Right, and the prediction is easy to make and it is perfect.
```
```
1) or 2). But that leads to the indeterminacy.

```
```
> you sill confuse 1 and 3 views.

```
You keep repeating that over and over like a mantra, but there is a possibility it is you that is confused.
```
```
It is up to you to show this, but, here again, you deny that after the duplication, whoever you will be, will recognize that he was not able top have predicted with certainty the particular outcome. This can only be "I will be in such city", and this will be refuted by the one in the other city. With comp, we agree that there are both "bruno marchal", and so the prediction was wrong. It was a selection in disguise.
```
Bruno

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 everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to