many-worlds fail

Originally posted by twhitehead
But the only way that equals a deterministic outcome is by denying any relevance to our own conscious experience.
... You are making a category error.

To show that a category mistake has been committed one must typically show that once the phenomenon in question is properly understood, it becomes clear that the claim being made about it could not possibly be true. (wiki)

I guess you're saying that we're not allowed to consider tracking conscious experience when we examine the MWI.

Originally posted by DeepThought
I don't understand the point you are trying to make. First are you still denying that the MWI is coherent? Or are you arguing that it's predictions are identical to the Copenhagen Interpretation's? The answer to the latter is yes, since otherwise it wouldn't be quantum mechanics. From the point of view of any given observer they have a history and th ...[text shortened]... r one to the other? This isn't suddenly going to allow libertarian free will or any such thing.

If you are referring to the coherence theory of truth, then I deny the MWI is coherent.
I don't give much of a care about the Copenhagen interpretation.

Or are you arguing that it's predictions are identical to the Copenhagen Interpretation's? The answer to the latter is yes, since otherwise it wouldn't be quantum mechanics.
If a person finds that those two interpretations do not yield identical predictions, then it isn't quantum mechanics? I'm skeptical. Look, it isn't hard to go over my head, but I don't baffle from bs very easily and I am not intimidated by superior intelligence. Hell, the smarter you are, the bigger your mistakes.

From the point of view of any given observer they have a history and there are observers in other worlds which have the same history up until some point when entanglement events caused them to diverge. So I don't see MWI "denying any relevance to our own conscious experience",
Such beautiful symmetry! Which is destroyed when you track conscious experience. We existed prior to divergence. We exist after divergence, BUT ONLY IN ONE OF THE BRANCHES. That is the non-symmetrical reality that MWI fails to deal with. The other branches are just as full of people as this one, but none of them existed until after the divergence. We, on the other hand, existed prior to the divergence.

which in any case is suspiciously similar to an argument to consequence, what it does is explain why our conscious experience is of events with definite outcomes.
What?

Further, I'm not sure I see what the advantage of random outcomes is relative to deterministic ones, why prefer one to the other? This isn't suddenly going to allow libertarian free will or any such thing.
What is this comment about? In the case that determinism is false? Killing determinism doesn't allow free will, but determinism denies free will. So I'm glad that determinism is dead. Because volition exists, and the universe is not a clockwork. But none of that concerns the op.

Originally posted by apathist
I guess you're saying that we're not allowed to consider tracking conscious experience when we examine the MWI.

That too.
But what I actually said was that you cannot declare something that gives all possible outcomes an 'event', nor can you call it 'deterministic' or 'non-deterministic'.

To show that a category mistake has been committed one must typically show that once the phenomenon in question is properly understood, it becomes clear that the claim being made about it could not possibly be true. (wiki)
Once properly understood, your claim that MWI leads to non-determinism cannot possibly be true. More correctly, a category mistake is when a claim is incoherent.

Originally posted by apathist
I guess you're saying that we're not allowed to consider tracking conscious experience when we examine the MWI.

That too.

Why not?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Once properly understood, your claim that MWI leads to non-determinism cannot possibly be true. More correctly, a category mistake is when a claim is incoherent.

That is your best? Wrong twice, without even an attempt at justification?

I freaking ROCK.

Originally posted by apathist
The other branches are just as full of people as this one, but none of them existed until after the divergence. We, on the other hand, existed prior to the divergence.

That is where you just keep on getting it wrong. The other people existed too.

Killing determinism doesn't allow free will, but determinism denies free will.
No, determinism doesn't deny free will. It denies some particular definitions of free will.

Originally posted by apathist
That is your best? Wrong twice, without even an attempt at justification?

I freaking ROCK.

I have no idea what you are on about. Are you saying I am wrong? If so, what am I wrong about?

Originally posted by twhitehead
I have no idea what you are on about. Are you saying I am wrong? If so, what am I wrong about?

I got an endorphin rush. It's hard to hold on to the keyboard.

Hey, see you in a teleportation thread pretty soon. I'm gonna hold your admission that you aren't those guys in other universes against you! No good deed goes unpunished.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That is where you just keep on getting it wrong. The other people existed too.

Absolutely not. Minds are produced by brains, IS THAT NOT SO. All the minds pre-divergence are accounted for.

Killing determinism doesn't allow free will, but determinism denies free will.
No, determinism doesn't deny free will. It denies some particular definitions of free will.

If determinism is true, then everything was determined at the start of our universe. Play semantics all you want, but then you have no choice, do you? Start a new thread. Here is all about MWI FAIL. I been drinking, sorry. Or am I?

apathist I guess you're saying that we're not allowed to consider tracking conscious experience when we examine the MWI.

twhitehead That too.

apathist Why not?

Yet another direct question twhitehead decided to ignore. I can't be the only one who notices his discussion style.

Originally posted by apathist
Absolutely not. Minds are produced by brains, IS THAT NOT SO. All the minds pre-divergence are accounted for.

Killing determinism doesn't allow free will, but determinism denies free will.
[b]No, determinism doesn't deny free will. It denies some particular definitions of free will.

If determinism is true, then everything was determ ...[text shortened]... choice, do you? Start a new thread. Here is all about MWI FAIL. I been drinking, sorry. Or am I?[/b]

One of you is, the others couldn't care less... except for that quiet one sitting off to the side, he's always sober.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That is where you just keep on getting it wrong. The other people existed too.

[b]Killing determinism doesn't allow free will, but determinism denies free will.
No, determinism doesn't deny free will. It denies some particular definitions of free will.[/b]

In my post that apathist was replying to I specified libertarian free will, in other words the unrestricted type, he's entitled to use the term "free will" in that context in his reply.