On 24 Jul 2016, at 22:34, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
wrote:
>> Both don't see both cities at the same time, but John
Clark certainly will.
> This is you clearest way to express your confusion between
the 3-1 view and the 1-views.
You say I'm confused and then start babbling about "the 1-
views"! That should be "the 1-view" . I know English isn't
your first language but plural isn't used after "the".
? Even Google translate "les jours et les fleurs" by "the days and the
flowers".
In our present case there is only one 3-1 view and two 1-views.
> Even if we can say that the two copies is one guy,
The Ohio and Missouri river merge with the Mississippi and so does
the Ohio, so if I'm going upstream on the Mississippi to the end
You mean to the source?
from New Orleans what one and only one place will I end up at? Or
is that a silly question?
Silly question, and there is no relation with the duplicating case,
where both path are instanciated.
> the fact remain that for all copies, the measurement result
(self-localization on W , M) are different for each of the copies.
Self-localization works great in the present (I know for
sure who I am right now) and it works pretty well looking back
into the past (it's hard to believe I thought that when I was 10 but
I guess I did) , but even in our world it doesn't work worth a damn
looking toward the future (I have no idea what I'll see or do or
think next year) ; and if the world had Bruno Marchal duplicating
machines Self-localization the future would work even less
well.
Going from a precise protocol where everything is defined to a fuzzy
protocol unrelated with the argument will not help.
In this case you have already agree that both copies agree to find
themselves in only one city.
You persist in demonstrating how irrational you need to be to sustain
your idea that there is no FPI in self-duplication. Well, thanks!
> and does not address any question of prediction
Prediction is hard, especially the future. It's even harder if
it's not made clear exactly who the prediction is supposed to be
about.
false. That ois clear. the non-clarity has been shown to depend on
your 1-3 confusion.
You can't give the correct answer if you don't know what the
question is.
> Thanks for showing up the strategy to hide the first person
witnessing the consequence of mechanism.
The ultimate consequences of mechanism are very odd indeed but
they are not paradoxical,
Nobody pretended the contrary.
and the only reason they seem strange is that our technology (not
our basic science) is not yet good enough to highlight those odd
consequences. That will all change in less than 100 years, perhaps
less than 50.
> It is interesting how your confusion 3-1 and 1 led you
directly to eliminate the first persons,
I'm not confused and it isn't very interesting, it's just
elementary logic. In a world with person duplicating machines THE
first person does not exist.
Then you die, and computationalism is refuted, which makes my point.
Again a case of implicit first person elimination.
The first person relative to the Moscow man makes sense, and
the first person relative to the Washington man makes
sense
and first person relative to the Helsinkii man makes
sense BEFORE he walked into the Helsinki man duplicating machine,
but after that talking about THE Helsinki man and THE first person
is just ridiculous.
This paragraph contradicts the identity theory of person on which you
have already agreed.
> please stop talking like if you knew that Aristotle is
correct and Plato wrong
Before it was changed the title of this thread was "Aristotle the
nitwit" and I think that was a far better name. Maybe "The
Ancient Greeks didn't know where the sun went at night" would have
been even better.
If Aristotle is a Nitwit why do you defend so much Aristotle theology?
Ah, I know, because you are a non agnostic atheist, that is a believer
in Aristotle's second god. Thanks for confirming that non agnostic
atheism is a variant of christian religion, but we already knew this.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
