RE: Conditional probability & continuity of consciousness (was:

From: Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sat Sep 8 10:31:58 2001

Jesse Mazer wrote:

>I don't really think there's some "other metaphysical realm" where we get
>dropped from, but I do think that, as an analogy, the spotlight one is not
>actually so bad. After all, if you think that you just *are* your current
>observer-moment, how can you possibly become any other one? The
>observer-moment itself doesn't transform--it's just sitting there timelessly
>in Platonia among all other possible observer-moments. So, it's better to
>think of "continuity of consciousness" as a spotlight moving between
>different observer-moments, with the probability of going from one to
>another defined by the conditional probability distribution.


I think each observer moment as the quality of "believing" it has just
been
light-spotted and expect very similar moment in its immediate
neigborhoods.

No need for external time nor external spotlight imo. Perhaps I am taking
your analogy too seriously.


>If we abandon the idea of an
>absolute probability distribution, we have no hope of explaining why I am
>this particular type of observer-moment experiencing this particular type of
>universe, and we can only explain why my future experience will have a
>certain amount in common with my current experience (assuming that's what
>the conditional probability distribution actually predicts).


But that is what each observer-moment can ask an explanation for. The
duplication WM experience illustrates that such question are senseless.
It is like "why am I in W" or "Why am I in M". With comp we can predict
that those questions will be asked, but there are no answers. We get
sort of necessary contingent propositions. No?


Bruno
Received on Sat Sep 08 2001 - 10:31:58 PDT