On 9/28/2013 12:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 27 Sep 2013, at 19:55, John Clark wrote:


On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au <mailto:li...@hpcoders.com.au>> wrote:

    > I do remember a conversation you had with Bruno about 5 years ago when 
you were
    discussing what a man in Helsinki would experience when undergoing the 
duplicator
    experiment.


Yes.

> I seem to recall you thought the man would experience being in both places at once,

No, that is NOT what I said! I said that if Russell Standish were duplicated then Russell Standish would be in Moscow and Washington. I also said the vague and sloppy use of words like "you"and "he" and "I" and "the man" is at the root of Bruno's intense confusion, and apparently yours as well.

     > which does violence to the notion of "survival after copying" assumption 
of COMP.


Bullshit. And this beautifully illustrates why I am reluctant to go back to square one and list all the blunders Bruno made in just the first few pages that I read, I have already written about 6.02*10^23 posts that covers the subjects in this post and most are in far far greater detail.

Just provide one link.

We have answered them all. You kept repeating the same confusion between different person points of view, or, in some post, you confuse the phenomenology of the indeterminacy with all their different logical origins. In many, you just change the definitions given.



I have come to the conclusion that logical arguments will not convince anybody if it is their policy to first decide what they want to believe and only then look for evidence to support it.


I have never met a scientist not convinced by the first person indeterminacy, accepting to discuss this privately or publicly. You try to avoid the debate, and that's the only strategy used by philosophers to hide the (quite simple) discovery.

You act like a pseudo-religious dogmatic pseudo-philosopher, it seems to me. If you would have a real argument, you would take a pleasure to explain it calmly, and without using insults and mocking hand waving.

So, provide an argument, answer the questions, or try to admit that you lost 
your point.

I'm not sure you even need to convince JC of the FPI due to duplication. He already believes there is uncertainty due to MWI of QM. Isn't that enough for your argument to proceed.

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to