2013/10/31 John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com>wrote: > > >> As I said before there is a profound difference between the two. After >>> Everett's thought experiment is over only ONE person is seen by a third >>> party so it's easy to determine who "you" is and easy to determine if >>> predictions about what "you" will see were right or wrong, but with Bruno's >>> thought experiment TWO people can be clearly seen that have a equal right >>> to the title "you" which means that the predictions about what "you" will >>> see are useless. And another difference is that Everett was talking about >>> prediction and probability, and neither has anything to do with identity or >>> a sense of self. [...] In Everett's case we know who "you" is, it's the >>> only fellow we see. In Bruno's case right now we see 2 people clear as a >>> bell and both are called "you" and both saw different things, and that >>> makes meaningless the question asked yesterday "what is the probability >>> "you" will see X?". [...] The diary is useless because the diary was >>> written by "you" and contains predictions about the further adventures of >>> "you", but now there are 2 (or more) people with the title "you" and no way >>> to determine which one the diary was referring to. And the diary is >>> useless because good predictions have no more to do with identity or a >>> sense of self than bad predictions. >>> >> >> > So are you at last ready to reject MWI...? if you don't, you are not >> consistent >> > > The following is a flow diagram of the conversation we've been having on > this thread: > > No you got it wrong, see previous message for the real steps...
Anyway, if 've waited too much to put you in the boitakon, meet roger and stephen li... you'll never acknowledge you're wrong, because you're just a troll. Quentin > Step 1: Quentin Anciaux states that John Clark treats Everett's ideas and > Bruno's ideas inconsistently. > > Step 2: John Clark points out the ways Everett's ideas about probability > and prediction and Bruno's ideas about the nature of self are fundamentally > different. > > Step 3: Quentin Anciaux neither agrees nor disagrees with John Clark's > points. > > Step 4: Quentin Anciaux inserts one or more personal insults directed at > John Clark. > > Step 5: GOTO step 1. > > John k Clark > > > > > -- > 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. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. -- 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.
