On Sat, 19 Aug 2017 at 1:30 am, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> There is a problem with asking "which one place will John Clark be in >> tomorrow", because there will be two of them, in two different places. >> > > True. Today before the duplication there is only one "John Clark" but > tomorrow after the duplication there will be two, therefore it is not a > question, it is just a sequence of words that follow the rules of grammar > correctly but mean nothing. However "How many cities will John Clark be in > tomorrow?" is a real question that has a real answer, and its two. > > > >> There is no such problem with asking "which one place will I be in >> tomorrow". > > > False. > Today before the duplication there is only one > "I" > but tomorrow after the duplication there will be two, therefore > it > is not a question > , > it is just a sequence of words that follow the rules of grammar correctly > but mean nothing. > And "How many cities will I be in tomorrow?" is not a question either. > > The language can cope with one "I" becoming two. The question is understandable and has a definite answer. > >> The original John Clark would be wrong if he bet >> > [...] >> > > THERE IS NO BET AND NEVER WAS! A bet needs a way to be resolved > > and this has none. Tomorrow nobody will be any wiser than they are today. > You can't build a grand philosophical construction on a foundation of sand > and this isn't even sand, at least the word "sand" means something. > > >> > >> The Washington John Clark will be right if the original bet "I will be in >> Washington" >> > > Only if "I" means a person who remembers making the "bet", and if it > doesn't mean that then what the hell does that personal pronoun mean? > > If that is what it means then "I" will be a winner AND "I" will also be > a loser. And so it's not a bet. > The two copies will each remember making a bet, and one will win while the other will lose. This seems quite simple and obvious; what do you think is wrong with it? > >> We can understand the question, specify what would constitute a right or >> wrong answer, make economic decisions based on the answer >> > > Explain what "bet" the personal pronoun "you" can make today that will > economically benafit the > person > al > pronoun "you" > tomorrow. And just as important explain what sort of rational agent > would cover that "bet". Who is on the other side of the "bet"? > I who am about to be duplicated bet $1 that I will end up in Washington. You, who will not be duplicated, are the counterparty to this bet. I am duplicated along with the $1 in my pocket. The Washington copy and the Moscow copy of me each give you $1. You give the Washington copy $2 and the Moscow copy nothing. This interesting thing about this bet is that you are not really gambling, because you know exactly what you will get, and since it is a fair bet you will have no net gain or loss. I, on the other hand, expect to either get double or nothing, and I don't know which. If the vet is not fair then rationally either you or I will have a reason to participate or not participate. If the payout is $3 I should make the bet and you should not, if it is $1.50 you should make the bet and I should not. > >> demonstrate that even rats have an instinctive understanding of the >> question; >> > > I went into that in some detail just a few days ago and you did not > respond, I'm not going to do it again. > > If you are referring to the fact that some of the rat copies will not get any reward, that is the same in the equivalent experiment without copying. If the rat has a 1/2 chance of a reward, after 10 trials there is a 1/2^10 probability that the rat will still not get a reward, so that rat won't learn the behaviour, but in a multi-rat experiment most of the rats will. > -- 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.
