Interesting point. It seems to me that given MacAskill’s original setup of the calculators, the second one really does calculate the first one’s function and adds the -. Like, if 2 + 2 where to equal 5 tomorrow, the first calculator would output 5 and the second one −5.
Idk . MacAskill’s setup is kinda messy because it involves culture and physics and computation too, these layers introduce all sorts of complexity that makes it hard to analyze. Whereas you seem to say that causality is meaningful for logic and for mathematical functions too.
So let’s stay within math. Suppose for instance we represent functions in the common way, with f being represented as it’s graph { (x, y) where y = f(x) }. Under what conditions does one such set cause another?
Interesting point. It seems to me that given MacAskill’s original setup of the calculators, the second one really does calculate the first one’s function and adds the -. Like, if 2 + 2 where to equal 5 tomorrow, the first calculator would output 5 and the second one −5.
Idk . MacAskill’s setup is kinda messy because it involves culture and physics and computation too, these layers introduce all sorts of complexity that makes it hard to analyze. Whereas you seem to say that causality is meaningful for logic and for mathematical functions too.
So let’s stay within math. Suppose for instance we represent functions in the common way, with f being represented as it’s graph { (x, y) where y = f(x) }. Under what conditions does one such set cause another?