Re: A riddle for John Clark
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: I see only your usual rhetorical tricks Those rhetorical tricks have another name, it's an obscure technical term called logic. Perhaps you've heard of it. Just answer this. I recall that W means I feel to be in W, and I feel to be in M, with the I being the first person I, To hell with THE! If a person has been duplicated then there is no more the, it's now a because that's what duplicated means. And a Helsinki Man today is anyone or anything that remembers being the Helsinki Man before the duplication. And yes yes I know, I confuse the 1p and the 3p; so cure my confusion and run through the entire duplicating procedure from start to finish strictly from *the* first person perspective without using ambiguous personal pronouns and using the and a correctly. I'm betting you can't do it. I recall that you have agreed that the first person experiences W and M are incompatible and belongs to separate streams of consciousness/first person experiences. Yes, obviously they are incompatible with each other, but neither is incompatible with the Helsinki Man if The Helsinki Man means something that remembers being a man in Helsinki before the duplication occurred. And if it doesn't mean that then what does it mean? 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: A riddle for John Clark
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 11:47 AM, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: they're not Helsinki man anymore. They both were, but then they diverged. Let's assume you're correct, then if the referent of the personal pronoun you in the question what city will you see? is the Helsinki man (and I don't know what else it could be) then the correct answer would be I will see no city whatsoever, oblivion awaits. But we both agreed that you would survive the duplicating procedure, so your initial assumption must be incorrect and the Helsinki man is still around. And because there is no logical reason to favor one city over the other The Helsinki Man must survive in BOTH Moscow AND Washington. QED. You're the one with the problem with personal pronouns. I'm not using them, so I'm baffled as to why you're bringing them back in. Let's try a different tack. Let's say I have a white Toyota. Then I duplicate it and one of them I paint red and one of them I paint blue. At that point, what is the clearest way to refer to the cars? Personally, I would go with white Toyota, red Toyota and blue Toyota. I would not be arguing strenuously about the need to refer to all three as white Toyota. Something about the duplicated cars has differentiated them from the original, so it is clearer to refer to them in terms of what has changed. And yes, cars are not conscious. I'm just talking about the clearest way to refer to the various 'bodies'. Let's stick with Helsinki Man, Moscow Man, and Washington Man. With the understanding that both Moscow Man and Washingotn man believes himself to be the guy that was just duplicated in Helsinki, but they are clearly different people from one another. If we do it that way we can see how easy it is to compare this to Many Worlds, where we might refer to Schrodinger's Cat experiment participants as superposed experimenter, dead-cat experimenter, and live-cat experimenter. Dead-cat experimenter and live-cat experimenter both believe they are also superposed experimenter, but they are clearly different people from one another as they have diverged. To save time I will include the standard reminder that it doesn't matter whether observers of either experiment would have ambiguities with the personal identity of the participants. It only matters whether the consciousnesses are continuous. Terren To save time I will include the standard canned response used whenever Bruno's ideas are shown to be illogical, I confuse the 1p and the 3p. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: A riddle for John Clark
On 08 Jul 2015, at 18:46, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 , Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Nonsense. I can show you the diaries proving that the Helsinki Man did write I see Moscow AND did write I see Washington. Yes, but (I see Moscow) and (I see Washington) describes two different, and exclusive, first person experience. Those two first person experiences are indeed different from each other but they do have one thing in common, they both have equally vivid memories of being the Helsinki Man yesterday, and if that's not what being the Helsinki Man today means then what does it mean? you are here again confusing the 3-1 view (an outsider description of the first person experiences (plural) of the two copies, and the 1-views [...] You keep confusing the 3-1 view and the 1-views I'm not generally a BIG fan of acronyms but you seem to like them and I fear you will get carpal tunnel from typing you confuse the 1p with the 3p so often, so how about YCT1PWT3P ? I the Helsinki Man predict that I will see Moscow AND Washington is correct if I-the helsinki man refers to two persons It refers to ANYONE who remembers saying I the Helsinki Man predict that I will see Moscow AND Washington. So Bruno you tell me, after the duplication how many people remember saying that? but after the duplication, I-the Helsinki man refers to two exclusive and incompatible FIRST-PERSON EXPERIENCES, There is absolutely nothing incompatible about two different people having equally vivid memories of being the Helsinki Man. Yes its odd because we are not accustomed to people duplicating machines, but odd is not the same as illogical. Not that predictions, good bad or mediocre, have anything to do with the nature of personal identity or consciousness. This is wrong, So when something does not turn out as you expected you black out and lose consciousness or no longer feel that you are Bruno Marchal or both. and irrelevant So your proof has nothing to do with consciousness or the nature of personal identity. Then what is it about? that has nothing to do with UDA Maybe so I don't know, I've forgot again what UDA is. I know you've told me before but it must be pretty forgettable. Wait a minute... I think the D has something to do with a bird... is it dovetail? I see only your usual rhetorical tricks, and you don't answer the question asked. Just answer this. I recall that W means I feel to be in W, and I feel to be in M, with the I being the first person I, that is the owner of personal diary/memory which is taken in the teletransportation box. I recall that you have agreed that the first person experiences W and M are incompatible and belongs to separate streams of consciousness/ first person experiences. I recall that you have agreed that P(coffee) = 1 (in the step 3 protocol) The question is: do you agree that in Helsinki P(W v M) = 1? Bruno 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: A riddle for John Clark
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: they're not Helsinki man anymore. They both were, but then they diverged . Let's assume you're correct, then if the referent of the personal pronoun you in the question what city will you see? is the Helsinki man (and I don't know what else it could be) then the correct answer would be I will see no city whatsoever, oblivion awaits. But we both agreed that you would survive the duplicating procedure, so your initial assumption must be incorrect and the Helsinki man is still around. And because there is no logical reason to favor one city over the other The Helsinki Man must survive in BOTH Moscow AND Washington. QED. You're the one with the problem with personal pronouns. I'm not using them, so I'm baffled as to why you're bringing them back in. All I want is to understand what you meant by they're not Helsinki man anymore. They both were, but then they diverged , and to do that all I really need is to understand exactly what you mean by The Helsinki Man. I thought it meant somebody who remembers being The Helsinki Man yesterday ,but obviously you think it means something else and I'd just like to know what it is. To save time I will include the standard reminder that it doesn't matter whether observers of either experiment would have ambiguities with the personal identity of the participants. But if you're describing the outcome of an experiment (thought or otherwise) ambiguities most certainly DO matter! Otherwise it's not science, it's not even philosophy, its more like very bad poetry. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: A riddle for John Clark
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: that guy in Helsinki was able to predict that wherever he will survive he will feel unique, in [] He, he and he! The use of ambiguous personal pronouns comes so easily that Bruno doesn't even seem to realize that Bruno is using them; it's like breathing, thought is required for neither activity. Nobody understands your point It's not my point it's an obvious point, and m aybe nobody around here understands it but this list is not the world, plenty of people understand it. A nd that my dear Bruno is why you haven't won the Nobel Prize. 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: A riddle for John Clark
On 09 Jul 2015, at 17:56, John Clark wrote: On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Just answer this. I recall that W means I feel to be in W, and I feel to be in M, with the I being the first person I, To hell with THE! If a person has been duplicated then there is no more the, In philosophy, this is called an indexical. In computer science, it is defined with the Dx = F(xx) diagonal technic and intensional variants. But here, when I say that I is the first person I, I use it for the notion, not for the person. It means *the* notion that we have defined using the diary etc. it's now a because that's what duplicated means. And a Helsinki Man today is anyone or anything that remembers being the Helsinki Man before the duplication. And yes yes I know, I confuse the 1p and the 3p; so cure my confusion and run through the entire duplicating procedure from start to finish strictly from *the* first person perspective without using ambiguous personal pronouns and using the and a correctly. I'm betting you can't do it. I recall that you have agreed that the first person experiences W and M are incompatible and belongs to separate streams of consciousness/first person experiences. Yes, obviously they are incompatible with each other, but neither is incompatible with the Helsinki Man if The Helsinki Man means something that remembers being a man in Helsinki before the duplication occurred. And if it doesn't mean that then what does it mean? It means that, no problem. We have agreed a million times on this. That is indeed exactly why that guy in Helsinki was able to predict that wherever he will survive he will feel unique, in a unique specific city, and a city that he could not have predicted in advance. With he denoting the guys remembering having been the Helsinki guy. Both of them congratulate themselves for having written in the diary, when in Helsinki: P(coffee) = 1, P(unique-city) = 1, P(W v M) = 1, and P(W M) = 0, as the diary contains the personal, particular, experience, which mention only *one* city, in both diaries, either M, or W. You don't succeed to justify why you don't move on step 4. You only repeat, like a bot, the same rhetorical tricks. You failed to explain anybody why P(coffee) = 1 (on which you agreed, or at least guessed) does not entail P(unique-city) = 1. You go out of your body at the duplication time, and never reintegrate, yes, only one body, indexically, after. You don't put yourself in the shoes of any of the continuers. But you need to do that, for each one, which is not that hard when the case is just one, or a few iteration of, duplication(s). Each one feel unique, verifying everywhere that P(unique-city) = 1 was correct. Nobody understands your point, and the ad hominem tone adds to the idea that your agenda is not really related to the topic of the list. Unless you change your tone and can tell me gently and politely, as clearly as possible, what is it that you do not understand in what I have just explained above, I will no more do much effort. I guess this thread becomes pretty boring for the participants. You always mock the 1p/3p distinction and then by abstracting yourself from it, you either see determinacy or ambiguity, where comp and the notion of identity on which we have agreed a million times entails what I say above, which is enough to proceed. Bruno 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
