On Jan 28, 2008 4:00 AM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 27, 2008 5:26 PM, Vladimir Nesov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 27, 2008 9:29 PM, John K Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "Ben Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > we can think about a multi-multiverse, i.e. a collection of multiverses, > > > > with a certain probability distribution over them. > > > > > > A probability distribution of what? > > > > > > > Exactly. It needs stressing that probability is a tool for > > decision-making and it has no semantics when no decision enters the > > picture. > > Probability theory is a branch of mathematics and the concept of "decision" > does not enter into it.
That's what 'semantics' word was for, granted it's loaded and can also mean rules of inference. > Connecting probability to human life or scientific experiments > does involve an interpretation, but not all interpretations involve the > notion of decision. It's more of a historical question. > De Finetti's interpretation involves decisions, for example (as it has to do > with gambling); but, Cox's interpretation does not... What's it good for if it can't be used (= advance knowledge)? For other purposes we'd be better off with specially designed random number generators. So it's more like tautology that anything useful influences decisions. -- Vladimir Nesov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=90409555-f1a8cf
