Re: tautology

From: Jacques M. Mallah <jqm1584.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 20:15:48 -0500 (EST)

        I am rewriting my reply to the previous post in this thread
because the one I sent last Friday for some reason did not get
distributed to the list, and I didn't save a copy.

From: Russell Standish
>> In any case it is always true that some way of calculating the
>> measure distribution is needed. Your claim was that the RSSA is needed.
>> My example shows that RM does the job.
>
> My understanding is that ASSA cannot assign a probability to p(Y1|X)
> or p(Y2|Z).

        Your 'understanding' is wrong. (Of course, I mean 'effective
probability' here.)
        Given the measure distribution of observation-moments, as a
function on observables (such as Y1 and X),
        p(Y1|X) = p(Y1 and X) / p(X)
        Not so hard, was it?
        [Note that here X was the observation of being Jack Mallah, and
Y1 was basically the observation of being old. See previous posts on
this thread if you want exact details of Y1; nothing else about it is
relevent here I think.]

> The real problem, and I have long pointed this out, is that absolute
> measure is completely irrelevant to what one observes about
> oneself. QTI is the assumption that p(Y1|X)=p(Y2|Z)=1, under
> appropriate definitions of what X and Z mean.

        Huh? Why should p(not Y1, and X) = 0 ? Especially since my
current observations are (not Y1, and X)!!!

> I don't think your measure argument is wrong, or that ASSA is wrong,
> its just that it doesn't disprove QTI. I don't adhere to QTI as an
> article of faith, however, it seems more likely to be the truth than
> not. If someone can come up with a good counter-argument to QTI, then
> of course I'll modify my beliefs. I have tried to falsify QTI, but not
> succeeded so far.

        That's BS. I have presented arguments that demolish the QTI such
as the measure argument and Occam's razor. QTI believers seem to take it
on faith to me; they have presented no arguments to support their case, as
far as I can tell, that make any sense. If you understood the measure
argument, you would see, as I explained in my last post "Re: On begin very
old" and in other posts, that it rules out any type of immortality.

                         - - - - - - -
              Jacques Mallah (jqm1584.domain.name.hidden)
       Graduate Student / Many Worlder / Devil's Advocate
"I know what no one else knows" - 'Runaway Train', Soul Asylum
            My URL: http://pages.nyu.edu/~jqm1584/
Received on Fri Nov 12 1999 - 17:28:33 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST