On 13 Apr 2015, at 00:06, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> You have already ans unambiguously agree that the Moscow Man is
the same person than the Helsinki Man, in the same sense than in
step 1.
As I said before the relationship is not symmetrical. Cats are
unambiguously animals but it would be wrong to say that all animals
are cats because one is a much wider category that the other, in the
same was the Moscow Man is the Helsinki Man but the Moscow Man is
everything the Helsinki Man was PLUS MORE (the Moscow experience)
therefore it would be wrong to say The Moscow Man is the Helsinki Man.
>> then by definition "he" can only be in Moscow. So which is it?
> The expectation, or prediction is asked to the Helsinki Man, so he
know than in the 3p view , he will be both.
To hell with the peepee crap and answer the question, is "he" John
Clark The Helsinki Man or is "he" John Clark
Both, see my preceding explanation of this, that you omit to comment.
> No, it was not. The Helsinki man does not predict that the M man
will see M (resp W). He predict that he, the Helsinki man, (who will
survives in both places in the 3-1 view) will see either M or W.
If "he" is John Clark The Helsinki Man then that prediction was dead
wrong because although John Clark may see all sorts of things in the
future John Clark The Helsinki Man will not see Moscow or Washington
or Helsinki or anything else.
Then you die already at step 1, and comp is false.
> By definition John Clark is John Clark-the Helsinki man,
As I've said many times the relationship is NOT symmetrical
Nor did I.
because John Clark The Helsinki Man is a much narrower category than
John Clark, there are many more elements in one set than another. So
John Clark-the Helsinki man is a particular John Clark but John
Clark is not necessarily John Clark The Helsinki Man.
> I am glad you say that John Clark will surivive, as it ease the
use of the pronouns,
No it most certainly does not, in fact the exact opposite is true!
If John Clark did not survive the multiple copying then personal
pronouns would be no problem, and that's why personal pronouns pose
no problem in our everyday world; matter copying machines don't
exist yet so if you shoot a man in Helsinki he is dead and it's
crystal clear who that personal pronoun refers to. But if matter
copying machines are introduced into a thought experiment then Bruno
Marchal can't keep using personal pronouns is the same casual way
people usually do, much greater care must be taken especially if the
entire point of the thought experiment is to understand the
fundamental nature of personal identity.
> But step 3 protocol is not the Monty Hall protocol. In step 3
protocol the experiencer has all the possible information available.
After the duplication but before the door of the chamber is opened
the experiencer doesn't know if images of Washington or Moscow will
be revealed. But Monty Hall knows.
>> If after the copying all the 6.02 *10^23 copies had different
experiences then they all are unique, but the feeling of once having
been the Helsinki Man is not unique.
> Which explain the indeterminacy
WHAT INDETERMINACY?!
> which, by the way, you admit above,
Bullshit.
>> it [the prediction] only said that at least one of them would see
X1, and at least one of them did see X1.
> If the prediction was "at least one of them will see X1" it does
not answer the question of the personal expectation. It hides the
indeterminacy which come back on the future first person experience.
There is no such thing as THE first person experience, there is
only A first person experience. And if you want to talk about a
future first person experience I need to know who's future you're
talking about.
>> If there is no ambiguity as you claim then give the poor man a
name not a pronoun. Is Mr. I John Clark or John Clark The Helsinki
Man?
> It is the same man,
And that is the root of the gibberish. They are not the same thing
but you refer to them both by the same personal pronoun and so
logical chaos results.
> and it is still the same man after the duplication, as you have
agreed that we survive duplication.
I agreed that John Clark survived the duplication but I did not
agree that John Clark The Helsinki Man did, that is to say John
Clark will not experience Helsinki anymore. And I did NOT agree that
only one John Clark would survive.
See Stathis post, or my own answer on this. You are cycling.
Bruno
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/d/optout.
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/d/optout.
