actions as morally equivalent, if the universe might be
canonically infinite.
Jon
On Oct 21, 2:50 am, meekerdb wrote:
> On 10/20/2011 6:37 PM, nihil0 wrote:
>
> > However, this class action argument assumes that the value-density
> > approach is an acceptable way to measure th
we thicken the stack of
> universes in which versions of us live reasonable lives,” he says. “When you
> succeed, all the copies of you who made the same decision succeed too. What
> you do for the better increases the portion of the multiverse where good
> things happen.”
>
>
he stack of
> universes in which versions of us live reasonable lives,” he says. “When you
> succeed, all the copies of you who made the same decision succeed too. What
> you do for the better increases the portion of the multiverse where good
> things happen.”
>
> Jesse
>
>
>
Hi,
Here is the abstract of Bostrom's "Infinitarian Challenge to
Aggregative Ethics"
Aggregative consequentialism and several other popular moral theories
are threatened with paralysis: when coupled with some plausible
assumptions, they seem to imply that it is always ethically
indifferent what y
On 9/27/2011 4:18 PM, nihil0 wrote:
> > 1) There is an infinite number of Hubble
> > volumes in our universe, which are all casually disconnected (as the
> > theory of inflation implies). 2) There is a limit on how much matter
> > and energy can exist within a region
squeezed together and could affect each other.
Brian Greene says they conducted a variety of cosmic handshakes,
establishing, for example, a uniform temperature.
Cheers,
Jon
On Sep 27, 2:46 am, meekerdb wrote:
> On 9/26/2011 10:35 PM, nihil0 wrote:
>
> > It's a little late f
It's a little late for this post since I've already posted 2 or 3
things, but I figured I might as well introduce myself.
I'm majoring at philosophy at the University of Michigan, however I'm
studying abroad for a trimester at Oxford. I turn 21 on Oct. 4.
The main questions I've been researching
be fit into my
> idea, I think, by saying that the observed is what has previously been
> called "absolute non-existence", and the observer is the fact that
> this "absolute non-existence" completely defines the entirety of what
> is present and is like the edge or boundary defining what is there.
> Speculating even f
Hi everyone,
This is my first post on the List. I find this topic fascinating and
I'm impressed with everyone's thoughts about it. I'm not sure if
you're aware of this, but it has been discussed on a few other
Everything threads.
Norman Samish posted the following to the thread "Tipler Weighs In"
9 matches
Mail list logo
