On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
I hope you are fine. > Thank you Bruno, I'm OK. > > > Mr. His was sure that his first person experience will be of being in one > city, then he pushed on the button, and both the copies claim, "yes that > prediction was correct: when opening the door I made the experience of > seeing only once city. > And if two copies claims were "I saw one and only one city so the prediction that I, would see one and only one city was correct" then a logical contradiction would result because there are two of them. So the claims can not be correct even if they sincerely believe they are. All this assumes the personal pronoun "I" means anybody who remembers being asked the question yesterday in Helsinki, and if "I" doesn't mean that then what "I" mean?. >> >> If Mr. His had been correct then after the duplication all the people who >> remember being Mr. His > > > > > Sorry, but that is the third person description of Mister His. > That's what I don't get, If today Mr. His isn't anybody who remembers being asked the question yesterday then who is Mr. Hid today? > > > The question was about what he expected to live. > Then the question is of no scientific of philosophic significance and I don't understand why we keep talking about something so trivial. Most people expect Jesus Christ will return in a few years but that doesn't mean he will. A far far more profound question than "Where do you expect he will live?" is "Where will he live?" or even better "Today where are the people who remember being in Helsinki yesterday?". > > comp predicts "the guy will feel to be in one city, that he could not > have predicted before" So there is something called "comp" that can predict it but nothing can predict it. Nobody knows the answer because nobody knows the question. What exactly is "it"? Yes yes I know," it" is about the first person view, but that is all predictable, tomorrow the the first person view of the Moscow man will be Moscow and tomorrow the the first person view of the Washington man will be Washington and tomorrow there will be no first person view of Helsinki at all. The only reason more can't be predicted is because you can't say exactly what it is you want predicted. > > You play dumb or what. > I don't think I'm significantly dumber than average so it must be or what. > > > The prediction is made before, > > but the verification is the one made by each first person obtained. > Nothing can be verified if its not know who the prediction was supposed to be about, and that is as clear as mud. You say it's not about the people who remember being asked the question so I have no idea who the prediction is about and thus have no way of knowing if any prediction was right or wrong. > >> >> >> And AFTER the button is pushed there are 2 people who go by the name "he" >> which causes endless confusion, > > > > > Here, you give credits to those who think you lie and try to deliberately > be confusing. > Bruno just think about that for a minute, why on earth would I do that? Why would I pretend not understand something when I really do, and why would I keep up such a silly charade for years? Maybe just maybe you should entertain the possibility that some people sincerely think you're dead wrong. And speaking of sincerity, do you really believe personal pronouns can be used just as they always have been even after people duplicating machines have become common without creating any confusion? > > > We have agreed since long that both are equal in being continuators of the > H-guy. > I thought we agreed about that too, and I thought we we also agreed that 1+1=2 but apparently not because if both those things are true then the H-guy will see 2 cities but you insist the H-guy will see only one. And yeah yeah I know, I confuse... But I think you're the one who is confused, you're confused by the fact that there are two the first person views, one in Washington and one in Moscow and both of them are the H-guy. > >> >> >> If it's one did it turn out to be Moscow or Washington? > > > > > You asked this before. > I know I've asked that before and I received no answer before, and I don't expect to receive an answer this time either. > > > Please read what follow very carefully, > If it's a real question then there is a one word answer, and I don't need to read one word carefully. > > > Now you tell me that this means only the tautological "the M-man finds M", > and the "W-man finds W", > Yep. Very dull and of no scientific philosophic or mathematical interest whatsoever but nevertheless 100% true. > > > both are still the same H-guy, > Yep. > > > and that the H-guy was unable to predict which precise city he will feel > to survive through in that experience. > That's because there isn't one precise city that is correct and one one precise city that is incorrect. It't not that nobody knows the answer, the answer does not exist; therefore it wasn't a question. >> >> What exactly did the Helsinki Man fail to predict? > > > > The name of the city that he will write in his personal diary soon. > I will tell you the one and only one name of that city just as soon as you tell me who "he" is. I can't give an answer if I don't know the question. What >> one and only one >> city will >> I >> Mr. Beforethebuttonispushed >> >> see after the button is pushed?" is that a question or is that gibberish? >> > > That is a question on the third person description of the localization of > the experience. It is not gibberish, but is not relevant. > Not relevant? If that's not the question you want a n answer to then I don't know what is. Not gibberish? Mr. Beforethebuttonispushed is about to become two, therefore there can't be one and only one city. > > > See Quentin post > No I don't think so. I no longer spend more than 10 seconds reading any of Quentin's posts and certainty never reread them. >> >> >> There are 2 first-person experience >> s and the Helsinki man correctly predicted who would see what. >> > > > > But fail to predict who among those who he was about to feel. > Bruno, did it ever occur to you that if the answer can't be known before the event and the answer can't be known after the event either then the problem isn't a lack of prediction ability? > > You talk in such a way that the first person has just nothing to say, > No, I talk in such a way that THE first person has two things to say not one and both of them are true because there are two THE first person. And that is not bad grammar, that is just one of the ways the English language will need to adapt once people duplicating machines are invented. > > And by numerical identity, and first person incompatibility of alternate > experience (unless telepathy), > You've been talking about telepathy for years now, I didn't understand why the first time you did so and I still don't. > >>> >> >>> There is no ambiguity, >> >> >> >> Then name the one and only one city it turned out to be! > > > > > If I could, there would be a weird third person indeterminacy. > If you could then there really would be no ambiguity and it would be a real question, but you can't answer it, not before the event and not after it either because there is no "it". > its study necessitate the study of all diaries. > A study of those diaries would be of equal usefulness as a study of telepathy would be. Zero. > > > The very fact that it is impossible to answer your question illustrates > that the differentiation is not predictable. > Hey don't push this off on me, it's your "question" not mine! > > > Just listen to the copies. > I did, and they named 2 cities not one. 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.
