On 19 Jul 2017, at 22:31, John Clark wrote:
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:42 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> Then it can't distinguish between the 2, then science has
no use for "THE 1p view" and it's just a waste of time.
> Of course they can distinguish it. It is as easy as seeing
the difference between Moscow and Washington.
If it's useful and can be used to distinguish between the two
then you can easily tell me which one has "THE 1p view", the
Washington man or the Moscow man. I'm all ears.
I have answered this a billion times.
I will answer it a billion + 1 times.
The guy has been duplicated. So in the 3-1 view, there are two 1-
views, obviously, and both remember having been the H-guy, and so,
being the H-guy, with the identity criteria on which we agree since
the start.
But, each feel being in ONLY ONE city, as thisi follows from Digital
Mechanism, and so,
1) *the* 1-view of the one in W is "I was in H, pushed a button, and
find myself in W without having been able to predict that specific
outcome".
2) *the* 1-view of the one in M is "I was in H, pushed a button, and
find myself in M without having been able to predict that specific
outcome".
Both suddenly grasped what I meant by the FPI, and both moves to step
4 happily, ceasing once and for all to bully people on the step 3 of
the Universal Dovetailer
>> from day one in Bruno Marchal's very elaborate "you"
duplicating experiment where predictions about "you" and "THE 1p
view" are made in nearly every sentence John Clark has been asking
which of the two who step out that "you" duplicating machine
Bruno Marchal is referring too.
> And everybody told you that both are that you.
And that is exactly precisely why the question "what one and
only one city will YOU see after YOU have been duplicated and there
are two of YOU in two different cities?" is such a astronomically
stupid question.
>> Cannot predict? But you just correctly predicted it and
so can the man (singular) in the boxes (plural). The M guy will be
the one that sees M and the W guy will be the one that sees W. Where
is the mystery? There is nothing else to predict.
> Well, either you thoink that the H-guy dies, and
computationalism is false, or that he survives,
Obviously the H-guy survives because somebody (in this case 2
people) survives who remembers being the H-man.
> in which case, both are the H-guy,
Obviously.
> and both admit they have differentiated when seeing which
city is in front of them,
Obviously.
> and both agrees they could not, for obvious computationalist
reason, predict their current experience.
What the hell are you talking about? You just correctly predicted
exactly what will happen, and it was easy! I repeat, what more is
there to predict?
Read carefully: what is asked to preedict is the current experience,
which is felt unique in each city.
It is the specific first person outcome of the experience started in
Helsinki.
> You are playing with words
I am thinking with words, you should try it sometime.
You seem to be unable to read words, like the preceding paragraph and
answer illustrates.
> Look, John, if there is no mystery, and no first person
indeterminavy,
The great mystery is figuring out what the words "first
person indeterminacy" is supposed to mean, I don't have a clue
and its becoming increasingly clear that even though you invented
the term you don't either.
See above. It is you who systematically drop a word or two when
reading a text. You missed "current experience after the duplication".
You older answer "W and M" is directly refuted by BOTH individuals.
> just give the algorithm for doing the prediction of the first
person experience.
I will provide such a prediction algorithm just as soon as you
tell me exactly WHAT THE HELL YOU WANT ME TO PREDICT!
Whay you, or any person doing the experience can expect to live, from
the FIRST PERSON pov.
> ?
!
> See my numerous preceding posts
Why? Your old posts age like a fine milk.
>> What is "THE self-localization" and which one of
the two has it?
> The one that both H-guy will discover after the duplication.
I don't know what that means, nor do I know what ONE and only ONE
city YOU will discover to be in after YOU become TWO
The 3-you, or the 3-1-you becomes two, by definition of the protocol.
But none of the 1-view or 1-1-view can know that. Both see only one
city, and cannot even be sure the other copy has been reconstituted.
Both understand that the specific city they see now makes the
experience breaking the symmetries.
It looks like you consider yourself as a zombie when getting an
digital brain, which means you are abandoning computationalism.
and YOU are in TWO different cities means. I do however know what
gibberish means and there is a handy test for it.
I can't answer the question "will this atom of uranium decay in the
next hour?" but after one hour I could say what the correct answer
to the question would have been, so it was a legitimate question I
just had no way of knowing what the answer was at the time. But long
after your thought experiment is over I STILL couldn't say what the
correct answer to the question "what one and only one city will you
end up seeing?".
Your copies know, and that is what count, unless you eliminate the
first person experience, in which case you have become a p-zombie.
And the reason a answer can't be given is because no questions ever
existed, there was just a bunch of ASCII characters with a question
mark at the end.
> It is just plain obvious that it could not have been
predicted.
I predict that the perfect answer to a gibberish question is a
gibberish answer.
You are eliminating the first person, confirming that materialist
needs to eliminate consciousness and all first person notions. (Except
it looks like trolling/bullying) but I do not care: to maintain your
point, you do eliminate the first person, and you never do the thought
experience: you never go to the point of listening both copies, as
they told you: I could not have predicted the specific outcome I am
living right now. You seem deaf to yourself.
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 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.
