On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> wrote:
> > You seem to agree that it's obvious the duplicating machine won't make a > difference. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. With or without a duplicating machine looking into the past you will always know with 100% certainty what you did or did not see, and with or without a duplicating machine looking into the future you can never predict with 100% certainty what you will see next and the best you can do is resort to probabilities. However without a duplicating machine, although you still can't make a prediction beforehand with 100% certainty, afterword you can know with 100% certainty what the correct prediction would have been, but that's not possible if duplicating machines are in the mix and it's not possible because then the following 2 sentences are NOT equivalent: 1) What will you end up seeing? 2) What did you end up seeing? Although both have question marks at the end only one of them is a question. The second one has a precise answer, the first one doesn't have a n answer, not even a approximate answer, not even in retrospect. They are not equivalent because the personal pronouns in them are not equivalent, and the personal pronouns are not equivalent because people duplicating machine s are used and because the past and the future are not equivalent. We can remember the past but not the future. > > This has been the whole point of the discussion If duplicating machine s make no difference why were they introduced into the thought experiment? And where is this indeterminacy I keep hearing about? > > looking forward to a 30% probability of a certain outcome without > duplication is equivalent (subjectively and behaviourally) to looking > forward to being copied multiple times with 30% of the copies experiencing > that outcome, whether you are a rat or a human. Without the duplicating machine after it's all over you can say "Yesterday I shouldn't have said there is a 30% chance event B will happen, yesterday I should have said there is a 100% chance event B will happen", but if personal pronoun duplicating machines are used then "you" couldn't say that. And that's not equivalent. 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.
