On 13 Dec 2013, at 17:22, John Clark wrote:

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Any time John Clark pretends that he does not understand or believe in first-person indeterminancy,

But I do believe in and understand first-person indeterminacy, in fact it was without question the very first thing that I ever understood in my life; even as a infant I realized that I didn't know what I would see next, and even if I did I didn't know what I would do next.

You confuse "indeterminacy" (the general vague concept) with the many different sort of indeterminacy: 1) by ignorance on initial conditions (example: the coin), that is a 3p indeterminacy. 2) Turing form of indeterminacy (example: the halting problem), that is again a 3p indeterminacy. 3) quantum indeterminacy in copenhague (3p indeterminacy, if that exists) 4) quantum indeterminacy in Everett (1p indeterminacy, which needs the quantum SWE assumption) 5) computationalist 1p-indeterminacy (similar to Everett, except that it does not need to assume the SWE or Everett-QM). It is the one we get in step 3, and it is part of the derivation of physics from comp.

Bruno




>refer him to his own post where he admitts to understanding it and believing in it:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/5PR1FXp_CSU/PnuTSn_82PwJ

> John Clark: "So yes, subjectively the intelligence would have no way of knowing if A was true or B, or to put it another way subjectively it would make no difference."

I stand by every word I wrote, especially "subjectively it would make no difference"; but if you're going to quote me quote the entire paragraph:

" Both A and B are identical in that the intelligence doesn't know what it is going to see next; but increasingly convoluted thought experiments are not needed to demonstrate that everyday fact. The only difference is that in A lots of copies are made of the intelligence and in B they are not; but as the intelligence would have no way of knowing if a copy had been made of itself or not nor would it have any way of knowing if it was the original or the copy, subjectively it doesn't matter if A or B is true. So yes, subjectively the intelligence would have no way of knowing if A was true or B, or to put it another way subjectively it would make no difference."

And I concluded that post with:

"the conclusion is the same, and that is the not very profound conclusion that you never know what you're going to see next, and Bruno's grand discovery of First Person Indeterminacy is just regular old dull as dishwater indeterminacy first discovered by Og the caveman. After the big buildup it's a bit of a letdown actually."

  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.

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 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