On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:36 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> before their specific experiences there were not two copies, neither >> the Washington man nor the Moscow man existed, only the Helsinki man >> existed. You can't make a prediction, or do anything else, *IF YOU DON'T >> EXIST*! > > > > > That does not make sense to me. > It makes no sense to me either! You complain that yesterday the Moscow man couldn't predict that he would see Moscow, but of course he couldn't because yesterday the Moscow man DID NOT EXIST. It was the very act of seeing Moscow that turned the Helsinki man into the Moscow man, but yesterday the Helsinki man COULD have predicted that and yesterday the Helsinki man was the only one capable of predicting anything because yesterday the Helsinki man was the only one that existed. And as sure as day follows night you will come back with "in the 3p view not the 1p" as if that chant explains everything. What does it even mean? Who exactly is the prediction about? Who do you wan't to make the prediction and lament that he can not? And who is Mr He?? And while your at at, please explain what on earth expectations or predictions have to do with consciousness or the computational theory of mind. > > > That would refute the coin throwing statistics too. > Damn right! Coin throwing statistics are logical and it all makes perfect sense, your thought experiment is dreadfully inconsistent and is filled with pronouns with no clear referent. At one point "he" seems to refer (although I could be wrong) to the person currently experiencing Moscow but a few word later in the same sentence "he" seems to refer to the person that will experience Moscow tomorrow and a few words later "he" seems to be someone who expects to experience Moscow tomorrow and a few words later "he" seems to be someone tomorrow who remembers seeing Helsinki today and a few words later "he" seems to be someone who will experience Washington tomorrow and a few words later "he" seems to be .... And then you ask a nonsense question like "What one and only one thing will **he** see tomorrow after **he** becomes two?" or even worse "What one and only one thing will **he** *expect *to see tomorrow after **he** becomes two?" P eas just ain't going be enough to fix monumental flaws like that. > > > We agreed that the W-man and the M-man are the Helsinki man, > No we don't agree! I think "the Helsinki man" means anybody tomorrow who remembers being the Helsinki man today, so obviously if that's what the phrase means then the Helsinki man will see 2 cities tomorrow. But you insist the Helsinki man will see only one city tomorrow, so you must mean something else by by " the Helsinki man " but I have no idea what that is. > > > So there is no guy who ever cease to exist. > But there are 2 guys who haven't come into existence yet because they won't see their respective cities until tomorrow, so it's a little unfair to ask them to make predictions because nonexistence rather severely handicaps ones predictive ability. > > Do you agree that in the case you are told (you, the guy in Helsinki, > before duplication) that the two copies will be offered a cup of tea in W > and in M, you can predict in Helsinki that after you push on the button, > you will drink a cup of tea? John Clark can neither agree nor disagree with that until Bruno Marchal explains if "you" is only the guy currently in Helsinki today or if "you" includes guys who tomorrow will remember being in Helsinki today. 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.
