RE: Any hope for Higgo?

From: Higgo James <james.higgo.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 10:12:09 +0100

Jaques writes:

        I find it incredible that Higgo can state that being old would be
        statistical evidence for QTI, since one would not expect that
without
        QTI, but still not realize that being young is statistical evidence
against it.

But Jacques does not say what 'old' is. In relation to immortality, 31 is
neither old nor young; in the same way, in relation to infinity, 31 is
neither a lot nor a little, any more than 457*10E900 is a lot or a little.

Jaques goes on:
        JH> Jacques, nobody denies that our measure decreases with time. Do
you deny
> that there is a billion-year Jacques somewhere out there in the
infinite
> universe?

                Are you trying to pass the disagreement off as some kind of
        semantics? It's not. Of course you know that I do believe there is
a
billion year old Jacques, so why are you asking that?

(I assume you are also OK with the notion that there is an infinite number
of billion-year-old-Jacqueses). Well, then our only disagreement is whether
you will become an old Jacques. I believe that you only experience those
universes in which you exist, so you will eventually experience being one of
those old Jacqueses.

Would you care to offer a non-SSA argument against this (SSA is inapliccable
to this situation, as I have pointed out, as you are the only immortal and
therefore not a representative sample).

James
Received on Thu May 20 1999 - 02:11:11 PDT