On 30 Jul 2017, at 22:17, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>> After duplication, one copy has THE experience of
being the one in Washington, and the other copy has THE experience
of being the one in Moscow
>> Therefore before duplication asking "What one and only
one city will my THE first person experience end up in, Moscow
or Washington?" would be a very silly thing to ask,
> If we talk about the body, or the person seen from outside,
yes, that would be silly. But if we talk about the unique first
person experience that anyone would live after that duplication, the
question
The question was asked BEFORE the duplication and it was asked to
one and only one man and the question was this "What one and only
one city will my THE first person experience end up in, Moscow or
Washington?". So AFTER the duplication in retrospect knowing all
there is to know what would have been the correct answer to the
question asked by that one and only one man, was the one and only
one city Moscow or Washington? If that question can't be answered by
one of those 2 words even in retrospect then it wasn't a question,
it was just a sequence of ASCII characters with a question mark at
the end.
The best prediction would have been "I predict that I will find myself
in the city of Moscow or in the city of Washington, and I am unable to
give any more precise information". Then after the experience is done,
both the W-man and the M-man, which we have agreed are both the H-man,
confirm the prediction. And they confirm it even more through the
repetition of the experiences, illustrating some possible use of the
frequency approach. But the Deutsch book approach wods also, but needs
population of person to be duplicated, to make sense of the bet.
There is no problem, once you keep in mind the 3p-self and 1p-self
difference.
> makes as much sense as asking the probability of HEAD when
throwing a coin.
In retrospect after I flip the coin I can do far better than just
give a probability, in retrospect I know the correct answer to the
question "will this coin fall heads or tails?" was "tails with 100%
certainty". I didn't know that was the correct answer before the
flip but I did after. And this is not limited to classical physics,
when I shoot an electron through 2 slits in retrospect I can get rid
of probabilities entirely and say the correct answer to the question
"where on the screen will the electron hit after it passes the
slits?" should have been "exactly precisely at that spot I'm
pointing at and nowhere else". I didn't know that was the answer
then but I do now. So both those questions were legitimate because
they had answers, I didn't know what those answers were beforehand
but they had answers that I discovered later. In contrast the answer
to the "question" you ask is not just unknown it is nonexistent, and
that's not surprising, an answer can't exist if there is no
question.
Then you eliminate the answer given by the W-man, and the answer given
by the M-man, who both got an answer, which of course is priavte and
subjective, that 1p, and, well, the question was about that future 1p
they are living right now (after the experience).
So here, being coherent with your materialism, you eliminate the first
person. But that illustrates my point.
>>Not only "will be", it would be the same with "has
become". Even AFTER the event is long over NOBODY can determine
which ONE ended up with the "THE".
> NOBODY outside the bow. But the old Clark in Moscow, and the
old Clark in Washington knows perfectly well which first person
experience they have lived.
But the question was NOT asked by Moscow Clark or by Washington
Clark! Helsinki Clark is the ONE who asked the question and
specifically demanded the name of one and only one city.
WE are the one asking the H-man "what do you expect and with which
weigh?". Like the H-man knows with certainty that he will get *one*
cup of coffee, he knows with certainty he will see only *one* city.
You can't answer Helsinki Clark's question and you're not alone,
even God can't answer it because it's not a question.
"what do you expect to live?" is a question. Eve God knows that the
best answer (the prediction) is "W or M", unless ... the first person
is eliminated. But then the candidate dies in the process, and
computationalism is false. You have just proved the point by a
reduction ad absurdum.
Bruno
Question marks just don't have the power to turn gibberish into
questions, not even if they're placed at the end.
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.
