On 22 Sep 2017, at 22:37, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>>Yesterday the Moscow man we can see today, was the
Helsinki man.
>> No. We agreed that "the Moscow man" means the man who
saw Moscow, but yesterday nobody saw Moscow.
> We agreed that the Moscow-man is the Helsinki man,
We agreed that today the Moscow man is the Helsinki
man of yesterday BUT the Helsinki man of yesterday
is NOT the Moscow man of today because yesterday the
Moscow man DID NOT EXIST.
That contradicts the identity criteria on which we have agreed.
You confuse the past with the future and the fact that the two can
not be treated the same way.
Nope.
> you must not neglect the question asked
I have no choice, I must neglect the question asked because
nobody knows what that question is, least of all you.
The question is that, given you believe that the H-guy survive in both
place, what do you expect, before pushing on the button, to live as
experience when pushing the button.
The answer is simply: I expect to find myself either in M or in W.
> which concerns the first person experience expected.
I care about the truth not expectations,
Then you don't care about the reasoning, and this shows you don't even
try to get the point, and we are wasting our time.
and which THE first person experience are you talking about?
All the unicity experience of all copies. I remind you the criteria:
all copies must confirms the prediction rule in the finite
duplication, and almost all in the infinite case.
"THE" is used, because all those experience are incompatible from the
first pov.
THE first person experience of the Helsinki man today? THE first
person experience of the Helsinki man tomorrow?
Yes, that one. That has been said since the start.
THE first person experience of the Moscow man today? THE first
person experience of the Moscow man yesterday? THE first person
experience of the Washington man today? THE first person experience
of the Washington man yesterday? Or the first person experiences
today of the people who remember being in Helsinki yesterday. I need
precision, sloppy language just won't do.
> You will become two is only the third person description.
Which first person experience Is Mr. You, which ONE is different
from all the others and uniquely deserves the noble title of "THE"?
All of them deserves the title of "THE", giving that all of them feel
theior corresponding city as unique. Which should be clear if you
agreed with P(tea) = 1. But you remain mysteriously mute on this. Go
figure why.
>>>> but of course he couldn't because yesterday the
Moscow man DID NOT EXIST.
>>> That makes no sense. Of course he did exist, he was
in Helsinki,
>> Now you're changing the meaning of "the Moscow man"
again,
> Not at all. Come on, we have agreed that,
We did but then unannounced you changed what the phrase meant in
the middle of your post.
Absolutely not.
We had agreed that "the Moscow man" means the man who saw Moscow,
but yesterday nobody saw Moscow so obviously yesterday the Moscow
man DID NOT EXIST.
That contradicts the identity criterion. The M-man is the H-man.
But now you say "the Moscow man" did exist yesterday, so I have no
idea what you now mean by "the Moscow man" and you have no idea
either.
That is ridiculous. As I said, the M-man is the H-man, when he is in M.
Once again you're trying to push on a string because once again you
don't understand that there is a difference between the past and the
future.
I don't see that. Please answer P(tea).
we have agreed that, roughly speaking:
W-man = H-man
M-man = H-man
That is very misleading, the H-man existed in the past but both
the W-man and the M-man will exist in the future. It would be more
accurate to say one is the proper subset of the other:
W-man > H-man
M-man > H-man
You are the Bruno Marchal of one year ago but he is not you; you
are everything he was but you are more than him because you have
had experiences in the last year that year ago Bruno knows nothing
about.
W-man ≠ M-man
Of that I certainly agree,
>> when you ask the question "What city do you expect to see?"
who are you asking, the Moscow man or the Washington man?
> At that moment, you can consider them as fused. The H-man is
both of them,
Both? If there are two there must be a difference between the H-
man and the M-man,
Not when seen as fused.
but at that stage nobody has seen Moscow or Washington, so what is
that difference between the H-man the M-man and the W-man? If there
is no difference it will only cause confusion to give them different
names. And what in the world does "the M man" even mean if it
doesn't mean the man who sees Moscow?
> I am asking just the H-man, about what he expect [...]
He expects Santa Claus's workshop! I don't give a damn
what the H-man expects to happen tomorrow, but I do give a damn
about who remembers tomorrow being the H-man today.
Both do. But none is aware of the other in the first person way.
> the prediction of the first person experience.
There is not one and only one correct prediction if the future
includes use of a first person experience duplicating machine!
Then digital mechanism is obviously wrong, as it is obvious that the
1p experience will be an experience of seeing only one city, for both
copies.
>> This is some complicated stuff we have no experience in so
intuition is of little help, thus words can't be used casually,
precision of meaning is essential.
>Don't patronize please.
After reading the 999th personal pronoun with no referent I
have come to the conclusion patronization is necessary.
>> you can't specify exactly what is suposed to be
predicted.
> I don't understand that remark at all. You know you will push
on a button, open a door and see a city, which will be either W or M,
And you just complained I was patronizing you, well this is why.
Who the hell was that Mr. YOU yesterday that was suposed to see
something today?. The prediction can't be about the John Clark who
experienced yesterday in Helsinki because that John Clark no longer
exists
Then it does no more exist with simple teleportation, and you just
argued that computationalism is false, making my point.
because yesterday is not the same as today and because today nobody
is in Helsinki; that fellow will see no city at all today.
Idem.
Is the prediction about all the John Clarks today who remember being
john Clark yesterday in Helsinki? If so John Clark will see Moscow
and Washington.
Confusion 3p/1p.
Or is the prediction about the person who will see Moscow and only
Moscow today? If so then "the Moscow man" would have been the
correct prediction. Or is the prediction about the person who will
see Washington and only Washington today? If so then "the
Washington man" would have been the correct prediction. Tell me
exactly who Mr. You is, tell me exactly who the prediction is
suposed to be about and I can make the correct prediction every
single time. And it's not even hard.
"you" is both copies. but the question is not who you are but who you
feel to be. And the answer is very simple: in the 3p, you will be
both, and the 1p you will be one of them, and it is obvious you cannot
predict which one. If you could, one copy will refute the prediction,
so the answer is simply "W v M but not both".
Let us verify. We ask BOTH of them if that prediction was fulfilled
and, well both agree obviously, and the problem is solved.
You make things far more difficult than it really is.
Bruno
> Keep in mind that UDA ...
...is babytalk.
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
