On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

>> You are asking about the present first person point of view of someone,
> > NO. read the question: it is about a future first personal event.

That is totally false! The Helsinki man  is informing you about his PRESENT
first person state of mind, he may be preoccupied trying to guess about
what his future state of mind could be but that doesn't change the fact
that you cannot communicate with the future Helsinki man you can only ask
questions to the present Helsinki man and regardless of the subject of his
thoughts he can only tell you about his present state of mind.

> >> Bruno Marchal has said, and John Clark agrees, that both the Moscow Man
> and the Washington Man are the Helsinki Man, and so assuming that the
> Helsinki Man believed the same thing and is rational, then the conclusion
> is obvious, the Helsinki Man will say that the Helsinki man will see
> Washington AND Moscow.
> >In the 3p view,

Yes, and as I've said before if 2 things are identical in the 3p they are
certainly identical in the 1p, although the reverse is not necessarily

> > but the question is about the future 1p view

In a world with duplicating chambers there is no such thing as "the" future
1p view.

>> For example: suppose the Washington Man said the Helsinki Man's
prediction in the past about a hypothetical first person point of view that
would occur in the future turned out to be wrong, would that mean that the
Washington man would no longer feel in his gut that he was the Helsinki
Man? Of course not! That's why to follow a chain of identity the way to go
is from the present to the past not from the present to the future.

>But we have to do prediction to confirm or refute a theory on reality,
> which is the present case.

Not with personal identity we don't! If you are like me and most people you
have made predictions about what you will do that turn out to be wrong, but
incorrect or not when that happens you still feel like you were the one
that made the prediction.

>>> This is just obviously wrong. It is correct in the 3p picture, but the
> question was about the 1p picture.

>> And that's the problem right there, THERE IS NO "THE" 1P PICTURE, THERE

> And?

And so in a world with duplicating machines asking about "the"  future 1p
picture is as silly as asking how long is a piece of string because it
depends on the string.

> It is not weird as it is only an indetermination on the person result
> after a self-duplication. the math are easy to do,

It's not just the math, everything about it is easy; the one that sees
Washington is the Washington Man and the Washington Man is the one who sees
Washington. What more do you want to know about it? What more is there to

>> both remember being the Helsinki Man, so although different both ARE the
> Helsinki Man,

> Exactly, and that is why the question makes sense.
So does the answer, the Helsinki man will see both cities.

> If he was asked on the 3p view after the duplication.

Apparently asking somebody something "on the 3p" is supposed to be
different than just asking somebody, but I have no idea how.

  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 everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to