Section 2 more analysis on the DD argument
This is my proposed formulation of the DD argument
the indifference principle requires that you define a unit of measure - there is some debate over that - in our case we chose humans - probably including neanderthals and homosapiens and maybe a few others. this is of course a part of a continum so there is really no valid justification for saying "bob is included but fred is not". An interesting example is to ask what is the probability that you moght be a person who was never born or what is the probability that you would have been a person who was born but never had a thought (brain dead)?
I suggest the optimum unit of measurement is actually 'a unit of thought' what that does is
1) create a continum between us and a dog (let's say) while puting the weighting on ourselves. that prevents us from saying somthign stupid like "the baby became a human as a result of the instant when passing beyond the outer skin of it's mother".
2) it is the minimum set of information - you do indeed know that you are thinking right now (or if you are not then it doenst matter if the thing you are not doing is not logical!) at a rather deeper level than you know you are the a person born at a certain time. Imagine a person who has lost their memory of their past and developed a new personality after an accident.
3) it reates a very basic unit rather like how atoms are a more satisfying explination than earth fire air and water
Imagine a budist sort of world where a simgle person experiences every thought of every thing in the universe - some being rich thoughts (like those of a person reading my post I hope) and some being very poor ones (like that of a sleeper).
What this does is it heavily weights the data in favour of future people. In fact a single 'post human' could suck up a massive amount of thoughts. Worse yet a concious simulation computer might come to be close to being half the experineces in the universe. a rich mind indeed.
It also justifies why we are a human as opposed to a bug - afterall our brains are more of a magnet for our 'counciousness' under this sort of anthropic principle.
the indifference principle requires that you define a unit of measure - there is some debate over that - in our case we chose humans - probably including neanderthals and homosapiens and maybe a few others. this is of course a part of a continum so there is really no valid justification for saying "bob is included but fred is not". An interesting example is to ask what is the probability that you moght be a person who was never born or what is the probability that you would have been a person who was born but never had a thought (brain dead)?
I suggest the optimum unit of measurement is actually 'a unit of thought' what that does is
1) create a continum between us and a dog (let's say) while puting the weighting on ourselves. that prevents us from saying somthign stupid like "the baby became a human as a result of the instant when passing beyond the outer skin of it's mother".
2) it is the minimum set of information - you do indeed know that you are thinking right now (or if you are not then it doenst matter if the thing you are not doing is not logical!) at a rather deeper level than you know you are the a person born at a certain time. Imagine a person who has lost their memory of their past and developed a new personality after an accident.
3) it reates a very basic unit rather like how atoms are a more satisfying explination than earth fire air and water
Imagine a budist sort of world where a simgle person experiences every thought of every thing in the universe - some being rich thoughts (like those of a person reading my post I hope) and some being very poor ones (like that of a sleeper).
What this does is it heavily weights the data in favour of future people. In fact a single 'post human' could suck up a massive amount of thoughts. Worse yet a concious simulation computer might come to be close to being half the experineces in the universe. a rich mind indeed.
It also justifies why we are a human as opposed to a bug - afterall our brains are more of a magnet for our 'counciousness' under this sort of anthropic principle.
posted by Genius at 4:36 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home