On 08 Feb 2017, at 03:11, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> Abandon the assumption that "he" will have a unique
successor because it's just not true anymore.
> Right, from the third person points of view that he can have
about himself, or better himselves.
No idea what that means, none whatsoever.
It means that the guy can say to his friend: you can join me at W
*and* at M. he talk about his first person experience from the third
person pov. Like Jules Caesar and Obelix.
That is the 3-1 view. It is not the 1-views, which concerns the
diaries in both cities: which *both* contains the statement "I see
only one city".
>> Stop using personal pronouns, all of them, because
they only create ambiguity and confusion. English and all languages
will need major revisions after such machines are invented,
particularly in regard to personal pronouns.
> The problem is a problem of possible first person outcomes
Yes, first person outcomes. That's plural.
Yes.
> We could ask a guy to do the experience, without giving him
the protocols.
You need more than a fancy word like "protocols" to make
a experiment or even a thought experiment scientific, you've got
to be able to explain what the referent is for all the pronouns
used. And you haven't because you can't.
I did. You need to read the posts.
By definition of the first person experiences (cointent of the
personal diary),
What does coincident with the diary mean exactly?
It was a typo. I meant "content". That definition is already in the
papers, and in all posts on this subject. read the post and memorize
the definition. That can help.
I assume it mean coincident with first writing it, but that
happened in the past and the though experiment involves people in
the future.
> In fact, we did abandon the use of I and he, to make precise
if we are talking of the 1-I and 3-I, distinguishes by their diary
contents.
After all these years I still haven't the foggiest idea what the
hell 1-1 and 3-1 mean. All I know it that BOTH M and W have 1-p
experiences and neither M nor W has the experience of writing in
that diary because that happen yesterday not today,
Both have that memory, and we agreed that both are the H-guy.
and it happened in a city that neither M nor W are in. So why do you
keep talking about that stupid diary?
Because its content is used to track the first person views. It works,
without any ambiguity.
> Amoebas duplicate all the time
Yes, and if amoebas had language the way they would use personal
pronouns would be very different from the way we use them; but
amoebas don't have language so they don't have to worry about it.
But we do.
This is handled very simply, both intuitively. But if you prefer, you
can do the math, where the pronouns are handled by Kleene's second
recursion theorem.
> If you think the W-JC and the M-JC is the same guy,
NO, NO, NO! W-JC is H-JC and M-JC is H-JC but W-JC is
NOT M-JC.
That is what I meant of course. W-JC is H-JC and M-JC is H-JC.
We did agree that W-JC is NOT M-JC. That's why there is an 1p-
indeterminacy.
A tomato is red and a fire engine is red but a tomato is not a fire
engine.
>>>So the guy right now in Helsinki can predict with certainty
that he will [...]
>> That is exactly the problem, who is this "the guy that
will" fellow? I don't know but he's certainly not the guy
right now in Helsinki
> Of course he is the guy in Helsinki. Not right now, because
time has passed of course,
Of course time has passed, so he's certainly not the guy
right now in Helsinki. So how does that diary you keep talking
about enlighten things?
by confirming the 1-indeterminacy, in both diaries.
> we have agreed that the guy survives (one en entire) in both
places.
Yes, and both have 1p experiences.
> Both can say: I was in Helsinki, and now I am in this precise
city.
Yes, and both have a equally valid claim of being that guy.
> Surviving applies to person. It makes no sense to ask a
doctor to survive in exactly the same state and time lived before
the operation.
What does survive in the same time before the operation even mean?
Nothing. You were alluding to this.
And if you stay in the same state after the operation then you can't
form new memories and there is a word for that, "dead".
>>> (whoever he can become in that experience) will see
only one city.
>> "He" has a name, USE IT.
> Than changes nothing.
It would put a end to this debate, that would be
something.
> See my older posts,
All your older posts have wall to wall personal pronouns and
ridiculous stuff like 3-1 view.
I have once given you a complete version of the argument without
pronouns.
Is that the post about THE 1p experience as if there were only
one when clearly there were two, or the one about the 1-3-1
experience?
>> No NO NO! It's NOT 3p duplication, it's a 1p duplication;
> No, that is logically impossible.
Then show me a logical contradiction that results from that; I
already know it would result in weirdness but that's not good enough.
It is a 3-1 duplication. With the diary-based definition, if the 1p is
duplicated from the 1p view (the 1-1 = 1 pov), you would I have in
both diary: I see both cities at once, which contradict the
computationalist duplication.
>You can only mean 3-1p duplication.
I'll tell you exactly what I mean, BOTH W and M have equally valid
1-p experiences and BOTH remember being H. Now it's your turn, who
exactly is the 1-p in a 3-1p experience?
Both are. The point is that the 1p experiences are incompatible. You
just cannot be, with that protocol, feeling seeing the two cities at
once.
> If there were a 1p-duplication, the diary would contain "Now
I have the feeling to see simultaneously the city of W and the city
of M".
I'm looking at the diary right now and it says "I was the guy at H
yesterday and now it is February 7 2017 at 1900 GMT and I see
W" and "I was the guy at H yesterday and now It is February 7
2017 at 1900 GMT and I see M".
That is nonsense. It is: " I'm looking at the diary right now and it
says "I was the guy at H yesterday and now it is February 7 2017 at
1900 GMT and I see W" OR "I was the guy at H yesterday and
now It is February 7 2017 at 1900 GMT and I see M"."
Bruno
And please don't tell me I'm confused because one was 1p and the
other 3p, or 3-1p whatever that's supposed to be.
>> Computationalism says that matter can duplicate EVERYTHING
if it is organized in the correct way, and that includes 1p.
> That is your confusion between 1p and 3-1p.
I'm so confused I don't even know if I'm confused because I don't
know what 3-1p means. And you don't either.
> By definition of 1p, the content of the diary,
The content of the diary is the definition of 1p? I think
you might want to try that again.
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 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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
