On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 6:54 PM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
>> > this distracts from the question asked, which concerns the first person
>> > pov, from the first person pov. That is the first person experience. [...]
>> > Comp accepts that both copies are equivalent (with respect to identity)
>> > continuations of the original, but the prediction bears on the first person
>> > experience.
> It is a mystery that Marchal can not get it through his head that copying a
> person means there are now 2 identical first person experiences because YOU
> HAS BEEN DUPLICATED, and the 2 will remain identical until one sees
> something that the other has not.
This has never been disputed by Bruno or anyone else, as far as I've seen.
Please describe what you believe your experience will be after
duplication. Describe it from your point of view. If you do not accept
to do this you are just refusing to consider the thought experiment,
nor arguing against it.
>> > If 100% was true, for P(W), we would have, in the iterated version, the
>> > history WWWWWWW... having a 100% probability, yet, all diaries but one,
>> > will
>> > contradict that prediction.
> If "you" predicted that "you" will see Washington and "you" does see
> Washington then the prediction that there was a 100% chance that "you" will
> see Washington
This a posteriori thinking is against the very concept of probability.
You can use it to refute the claim that if I throw a coin, the
probability that I see heads is 0.5. It becomes either 0 or 1.
> was correct and it doesn't matter how many people who also
> lay claim to the title "you" don't see Washington.
>> > The proba concerns the first person experience that you will live, and
>> > recall in the next instants, by writing it in the diary.
> 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.
You can use the same argument to refute all of medical research. The
antibiotic either cures you or doesn't. By this reasoning, one might
as well take a tic tac to cure cancer.
> 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 email@example.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
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 post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.