O n Tue, Aug 1, 2017 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > The bet that Helsinki Clark makes is on whether he finds himself on > > Moscow or not after the duplication. I knew it, HE! It always comes down to "he" because there is just no better place to sweep sloppy thinking under the rug than a good old personal pronoun with no referent. If you think you're just using the pronoun because it's easier to type "he" than " Helsinki Clark " the following betting terms would be equivalent to the terms written above: *The bet that Helsinki Clark makes is on whether Helsinki Clark finds Helsinki Clark in Moscow or not after the duplication. * Therefore, provided "Helsinki Clark" means somebody named Clark who remembers being in Helsinki (if not what does it mean?) then there is a 100% chance Helsinki Clark will win the bet AND a 100% chance Helsinki Clark will lose the bet. Claiming this averages out to 50% is a misuse of probability, it's like saying most people have half a child because on average most people have two and a half children. We can predict with 100% certainty that nobody will see half of Moscow and win half a bet, instead we predict somebody will see all of Moscow and win all of a bet and somebody will see none of Moscow and not win any part of the bet. And both will be somebody named Clark who remembers being in Helsinki. And that is all that can be said about it before the duplication and that's all that can be said about it after the duplication; and if there is nothing to predict the failure to predict it is not a failure of prediction. > > > this doesn't change the fact that there is a > > first person view of the universe where a Clark experiences winning a > > bet after facing 50/50 uncertainty. Do you deny this? > Yes I deny this! If it's after winning the bet then it must be after the duplication, so there will be *2* first person views of the universe by somebody named Clark who remembers being in Helsinki , one where Clark won the bet and one where Clark lost the bet. A ll this can be predicted with 100% certainty. What hasn't been predicted that will be revealed in the future? If there is n othing then it's not a bet and it's not a thought experiment. And if "I" have already won that bet ( or any bet for that matter ) then there is a 100% chance "I" have already won that bet not 50% , a statement that may not be profound but is true nevertheless. > > The bet is: Washington or Moscow? > > Clark utters one if this words, No, Clark utters both of those words the instant Clark opens the doors of the duplicating booths in Washington and Moscow. Which one utters "Moscow"? Answer: Moscow Clark is the that sees Moscow and utters "Moscow" because seeing Moscow is the very thing that turns Helsinki Clark into the Helsinki Clark that saw Moscow ; a statement that may not be profound but is true nevertheless and is certainly on topic considering the title of this thread. > > >> > >> depending on context sometimes pronouns have meaning and sometimes they >> do not, and in a world >> >> with people duplicating machines its far easier to write a sentence in >> which >> >> they do not. > > > > > Maybe, but it doesn't matter. It a personal pronoun is use in the terms of the bet and it has no clear meaning then it matters a great deal. > > How am I being ridiculous exactly? The uterus produces new human > beings, and they are indeed copies of their parents Nonsense. The offspring only has half the genes of a parent and none of the memories. To say the uterus is a people duplicating machine is just silly. 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.
