On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

​> ​
> That is why we have to make the question more precise, and replace "1)" by
> either 1') "What will 1-you end up seeing?" or by 1'') "What will 3-you end
> up seeing?".
> ​
> ​
> In that case, given that we assume computationalism (so we know that 1-we
> survive in one unique city), the answer to 1') is "1-I expect to find
> myself in W or in M", and the answer to 1") is I expect anybody to see 3-me
> in both W and M.
>

Wow, that's a lot of homemade jargon crammed into a very small space : ​

1) 1
2) 1'
3 1-I
4) 1-you
5) 3-you
6) 3-me
7) 1-we

I give you credit for not getting into the peepee this time but I think
1-we is new. If you want to be precise then say exactly what each of the​
above end up seeing and how what they end up seeing differs from what all
the others see.


> ​> ​
> the person in Helsinki expect to survive
>

​
Expects? I have no idea what the person in Helsinki expects to happen, nor
do I care what he expects. However I do care about what does happen and
that is
​ ​
that
​ ​
2 PEOPLE not one will remember being the Helsinki man. To ask which one
​of the two ​
is the real Helsinki man
​ ​
and
​ ​
who has the "*THE* 1p"
​ ​
is just silly.

​> ​
> BTW you did not answer my last messages where this has been explained. I
> also asked you a question there. I copy the message below for your ease(*).
> Take all your time, but please avoid the ad hominem stuff.
>

​I did not give an answer​

​because I was not asked a question. You may have included a question mark
in your remarks but you also specifically said the following" ​

*​"​The question is on the first person experience which will be lived.​"​*

That's like claiming the discovery of a new form of indeterminacy because
the following "questions" have no answer:

How long is a piece of string?
How many eggs?
Which red blueberry is instantaneously redacted inside a jukebox?

Look, if you ask me a question I will do one of the following 3 things:

1) Give the correct answer.
2) Give a incorrect answer.
3) Say I don't know.

But I can't do any of those 3 things if I don't get a question, and
although a question mark is necessary to type a question it is not
sufficient.


> ​> ​
> The result has been known in the future by the first person(s) involved.
>

​Yes person*s*, that's plural, that means there are more than one, and yet
the "question" demands one and only one answer. And that's why it's not a
question. Specify which the "THE 1p" you want to know about, the one in W
or the one in M, and I'll give you an answer, probably the correct answer.
 ​



> ​> ​
> There is nothing paradoxical, as long as we distinguish the 1p and 3p
> discourses.
>

​I agree, talking about the "*THE* 1-p" in a world that contains 1-p
duplicating machines is ​not paradoxical, it's not even odd, it's just
gibberish.

​Paradoxes and odd things are interesting and fun, gibberish ​is not.


> ​> ​
> the question was on the unique* first person* experience that anyone can
> live in a self-multiplication scenario
>

I know,
​and that's why it's not a question. I
t doesn't specify which unique first person
​ the "question" is about.
If a question about the future can't be answered, not ​even approximately,
not even in retrospect, then it's not a question.

​ 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to