On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 22:10, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 6:49 PM Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > *> The probability of interest is that one particular John Clark will see >> a prime number, not that some John Clark will see a prime number. A gambler >> who buys a lottery ticket is interested in the probability that one >> particular gambler will buy the winning ticket, not the probability that >> some gambler will buy the winning ticket* >> > > BEFORE the duplication "one particular John Clark" and "some John Clark" > are exactly the same person, that is Bruno's Mr.You, that is the person > Bruno makes his bet with. Thus AFTER the duplication the identity of Mr.You > becomes completely ambiguous, there is now no way to tell who he made the > bet with, or how to determine the outcome and figure out who won and who > lost. And that's why Bruno loves personal pronouns so much and refuses to > stop using them, they can be used to sweep logical contradictions and > absurdities under the rug, and that can be very useful if the towering > logical edifice of your theory is built on a foundation of sand. The only > way Bruno can stop using personal pronouns is by means of Bruno's patented > peepee terminology and start talking about *THE* First Person > Perspective, when of course after the duplication there is no such thing as > *THE* First Person Perspective, there is only *A* First Person > Perspective. > > > *Nothing singles him out, one is picked at random out of the 100,* > > > But this entire thought experiment Is about what "you" can predict BEFORE > the duplication, Back then nobody can single anybody out because there is > only one John Clark. And this thought experiment is about what "you" can > expect to see, so the gambler must be Mr.You, so the gambler is also > duplicated 100 times. > > *> and the question is asked, what is the probability that this particular >> one will see a prime number? * > > > I can predict today with 100% certainty that tomorrow AFTER the > duplication when the John Clark in room #11 walks out turns around and > looks at the number on his door he will see a prime number, but that is a > very VERY long way from the original ambiguous question that was asked > BEFORE the duplication, namely "AFTER the duplication what is the > probability "you" will see a prime number?". And that has no answer > because it is not a question, it's gibberish. > I think what you and Bruce Kellett are perhaps objecting to is the dualist idea that there is a unique John Clark soul, with the question of probability with duplicates implicitly asking which one of the duplicates this soul will fly into. We know that souls are delusional, and this applies to a single world situation also. If you survive the night, it means that an entity identifying as John Clark wakes up in your bed tomorrow morning, not that your soul has persisted in the one body. If there are 100 John Clarks tomorrow then John Clark has survived, because all it takes is one, and there is a 25/100 probability that a randomly chosen John Clark will see a prime number. This is the non-delusional interpretation of the question “what is the probability that you will see a prime number?”. The “you” cannot refer to a magical soul, because such a thing never existed in the first place. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypVi7SnCX_7kY3v-33YKfBpADtyiNbhMgK3NYo6BOmQQ0A%40mail.gmail.com.
