On 11 Dec 2013, at 18:10, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 5:40 AM, Telmo Menezes
<[email protected]> wrote:
> We always feel that we are a single person
Yes but the copy that walked out of the duplicating chamber with you
(or perhaps you are the copy and he is the original, no way to tell
and no reason to care) also feels like a single person, and the
exact same single person that you do.
> We feel that we have a past;
Yes, and the copy of you that was made 5 seconds ago vividly
remembers when he was in kindergarten 20 years ago.
> if you use Everett's interpretation to think about reality, then
personal pronouns become ambiguous in the exact same way that you
always point out.
No they do not. In Everett it's always obvious who I'm talking about
when I use the personal pronoun "you", it's the only other fellow in
the room with me; but in Bruno's thought experiment there is a man
standing to the right of the duplicating machine and a identical
looking man standing to the left of the duplicating machine and they
both have a equal right to use the grand title "you".
But they know pretty well who they are in the first person way, so
what you indicate justify the first person indeterminacy instead of
eliminating it.
When I ask, after the duplication, I know very well what "1-you" mean
in all circumstances: it means "the W" guy, when I address the
question to the W-guy, and it means the M-guy when I address the
question to the M guy.
One told me: I see in my diary that I predicted (in Helsinki) that I
would be at both places, but I see now that this was wrong because I
feel myself to be in only W, and I understand that the question what
about that feeling.
The other told me: I see in my diary that I predicted (in Helsinki)
that I would be at both places, but I see now that this was wrong
because I feel myself to be in only M, and I understand that the
question what about that feeling.
Both now grasped the 1-indeterminacy, and are aware they cannot
predict the personal outcome of a self-duplication.
OK?
Bruno
> Under the MWI, observing the behaviour of an electron is
equivalent to going through a duplicator,
No it is not because in MWI the entire universe is duplicated
including the observer so he never sees more than one electron so he
can safely use the pronoun "it"; but with Bruno's duplicating
chamber the observer is not duplicated only the electron is, so he
sees 2 electrons, so to avoid ambiguity that solo observer would
have to say "it on the right" or "it on the left", just saying "it"
won't do.
> Personal pronouns are part of language that evolved under a
certain model of reality
Yes, and the environment personal pronouns evolved in did NOT
include duplicating chambers, if it had the rules of grammar
regarding them would be very different from what they are now.
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
