On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 at 1:56 am, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>> >> >>> Pronouns work fine today because nobody has yet made a "I" duplicating >>> machine, but when they do the English language is going to need a massive >>> overhaul. >>> >> >> > >> There are already billions of "I's" in the world without such a >> duplicating machine, and no-one is confused by the large number of them. >> > > > That's because none of the > > billions of "I's" in the world > > right now claim to be the same I. > After duplication, the copies will not claim to be the same person any more, because there are obviously two of them. But they will each correctly refer to themselves as "I", and talk about their shared past before the duplication. The fact that pronouns seldom cause confusion today (except on this list) > isn't due to some physical law or deep philosophical principle, its simply > due to a temporary lack of technological prowess that limits the options on > what we can do. It's the same reason we don't today have 600 > > mph trains crossing continents. > > There is no physical mathematical or philosophical reason this > insufficient engineering capability > > will continue forever, or even until the end of this century. The times > are changing. > > > >> If the subject predicts, prior to duplication, "I will see W" then >> > [...] >> > > Then will that "prediction" turn out to be correct? > > After the duplication one I will say yes and the other I will say no. So > the answer to the question isn't just unknown > prior to duplication > it *doesn't exist*, and the answer doesn't exist after the duplication > either. The answer will NEVER exist. So it's not a question. > You agree that after the duplication one will say he was right and the other will say he was wrong, which is an answer, and an easily verifiable one, so why do you say the answer does not exist? > >> one copy will be correct and the other copy will be wrong. >> > > Yes, and > BOTH are "I: > > . And all this is 100% predictable. > But not to the copies, because it will seem to them that they either got lucky or got unlucky with the answer. Everyone watching knows exactly what will happen, the subject prior to duplication knows intellectually exactly what will happen, but the subject nevertheless has a sense of uncertainty because he feels he will end up in one or other city, but not both. It is this subjective sense of uncertainty despite knowing exactly what will happen objectively that is the first person indeterminacy. Perhaps you can see this, but your mind rebels at the thought of it, driving you to call it "gibberish" where others might use a different word such as "paradoxical". > >> If the subject predicts, prior to duplication, "SP1 will see W" then >> both copies will be correct. >> > > True because tautologies are always true; SP1 means the > Stathis Papaioannou > that will see W. And all this is easily predictable, so who's going to > be stupid enough to take their bet? And where is this indeterminacy I keep > hearing about. > > 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. > -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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.
