On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> >> the H-man doesn't have the right to call himself the W or M man > because they don't exist yet and the future is always uncertain. > > > Well, not always, but certainly in this case. This betrays that you get > the point. The H-man cannot say it will be the M-man, or the W-man > We're talking about the future so the H-man can't be certain that the machine is going to work or even that you were telling the truth when you said you had a duplicating machine. And even if the H-man was certain of all that he knows nothing about either Washington or Moscow and knows nothing about what sights and adventures his future self will have in either city so the Helsinki man can't identify with either the Washington man or the Moscow man; however they can and do identify with them because they remember being him and they know more about the past than the future, that's why time has a direction. > ? > ! >From the third person, after the duplication > As a point of interest, up to this point it's OK to use the word "you", it's clear who the pronoun refers to. > and box opening > But at the instant the box is opened and different things revealed "you" is turned into the Washington man and "you" is turned into the Moscow man, so back in Helsinki to ask "what will "you" see?" is ambiguous. > the brain differentiate quickly > Perhaps, it depends on how different Washington is from Moscow. > and the question is about which differentiation you will live. > The question is who is "you", is it: A) The man who is still experiencing Helsinki B) The men who remember being the Helsinki man C) Neither of the above but just a unspecified other. Your answer seems to be C and that is at the root of your confusion. > The prediction is on which different brain (the one in W after the box is > open, versus the one in M) you will feel to own. > Both answers can be confirmed by people who remember being the Helsinki man; John Clark doesn't know how that relates to "you" and Bruno Marchal doesn't know either, if Bruno Marchal did know Bruno Marchal would stop using personal pronouns when Bruno Marchal knows of the confusion they create, but then clarity my not be desired if ideas are bad. > The Helsinki guy cannot be sure if he will experience seeing W or M. >>> >> >> >> WHO THE HELL IS "HE"??? >> > > > Some guy who will have an experience. He is notably, the Helsinki guy. > But it's not just "you", Bruno Marchal is also inconsistent on who the Helsinki guy is, sometimes he's: 1) the guy experiencing Helsinki and then the Helsinki guy will see no city at all when he pushes that button, not even Helsinki; but at other times Bruno Marchal says 2) the Helsinki guy is the Moscow man seeing Moscow and only Moscow AND the Helsinki guy is the Washington man seeing Washington and only Washington. I can accept either definition of "the Helsinki man" but not both, for me to understand what you're trying to say you need to make up your mind. >> Bruno Marchal just agreed that the Helsinki guy will turn into the >> Washington guy and see Washington AND Bruno Marchal just agreed that the >> Helsinki guy will turn into the Moscow guy and see Moscow >> > > > > In the 3p view on the 1p views. > It might be helpful if Bruno Marchal could explain, without using pronouns but by giving the subject a actual name, how "the 3p view on the 1p views" (whatever that is) differs from some other view. > But the guy in Helsinki knows that he will with certainty feel to be in > one city, > And that is exactly what happens he will feel to be in Washington and only Washington and he will feel to be in Moscow and only Moscow because HE HAS BEEN DUPLICATED. > > and obviously he cannot predict which one. > One? How can there be one? There are two cities and two hes. >he cannot predict his future 1view, > I don't know what he can or can not predict because I don't know who he is, but I just predicted the Helsinki man's future and I was correct, assuming "the Helsinki man" is not just the guy experiencing Helsinki. > >> so obviously the Helsinki guy will see Moscow AND the Helsinki guy will >> see Washington. >> > > > That's correct, but does not address the question which is about the > unique future 1view that he will live with certainty. > If that's correct, and it is, then obviously there is no unique future 1 view for the Helsinki man, although there is a unique past one for the Moscow man and the Washington man. > Here you persist in avoiding the question about the future unique first > person view, > That is the exact point where Bruno Marchal's reasoning fails, in a world with duplicating chambers the future first person view is NOT unique, the Helsinki man's future includes being BOTH the Moscow man AND the Washington man. However even with duplicating chambers the past first person view remains unique, the Washington man was the Helsinki man and only the Helsinki man and the Moscow man was the Helsinki man and only the Helsinki man > You just explain the indeterminacy, which is not paradoxical because YOU >> HAVE BEEN DUPLICATED INDEED. >> > > Yes YOU HAVE BEEN DUPLICATED, so when Bruno Marchal asks the question > "what city will "you" see?" who is supposed to be doing the seeing? > > The point is that with comp, we cannot tell. So the pronoun "you" doesn't refer to anything and your question is equivalent to "what city will qskfhdkt44t see?". In other words the question is gibberish. > And given that both the duplication and the seeing happens in the future > who is Bruno Marchal asking the question of? > > Nobody needs to know that. So you don't know what the question means and you don't know who you're asking it to. > The prediction W is wrong > But I find Bruno Marchal in Washington and Bruno Marchal informs me that the prediction was correct. > The prediction M is wrong > But I find Bruno Marchal in Moscow and Bruno Marchal informs me that the prediction was correct. > The prediction W and M is wrong > Bruno Marchal disagrees. > The prediction W or M is correct > OK Bruno, the experiment is long over and now that you have all the information you will ever have on the matter what would have been the correct prediction back in Helsinki, W or M? I'm not asking for a prediction, the experiment is now in the past so interview anybody and everybody and tell me did "you" see W or M? Bruno Marchal insists there is one unique answer so let's hear it! If there still isn't a answer then the question must have been gibberish. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.