Typical example: kidnapper takes a child, and threatens to shoot them if a ransom is not paid. The parents are going to pay the ransom, but in order to make that decision, they need to think about the counterfactual in which they don’t pay—they need to have beliefs about that counterfactual.
Uh. A counterfactual is “what would have been if...”, not about what may or may not come to pass. Your example is about possible futures (to kidnap or not to kidnap, or to pay ransom or not to pay ransom), so there is no issue there. From SEP:
counterfactual modality [...] concerns what is not, but could or would have been.
Remember the topic is *reductive* agency. The parents and the kinapper are all made of atoms. For our purposes, they’re deterministic. They will, in fact, only take one of the “possible” actions. The other actions are counterfactual.
I don’t think you are using the standard definition of a counterfactual. Future possibilities are never counterfactual. Unless MIRI has its own non-standard definition.
At a guess, those in favor of counterfactuals hold that the sense in which multiple things can happen (in the future) is also the sense in which counterfactuals could have happened.
Would a quantum random number generator that is as likely to output “0” as “1″ help? (It seems like there is a meaningful sense for such things that “this set up has a prior probability distribution which exists”—as opposed to a (deterministic) coin flip.).
At a guess, those in favor of counterfactuals hold that the sense in which multiple things can happen (in the future) is also the sense in which counterfactuals could have happened.
I understand that this is a tempting thought, but ultimately counterproductive. Future, whether set or not, is yet unknown. You can also evaluate probabilities of events that are unknown to you but have already happened. What I find useless is the reasoning of the type “I know that X happened, but what if it didn’t, all else being equal?”
Let’s, think of a use for it. For instance, if an outcome depends on a decision you made, considering what would have happened if you made a different decision can help refine your decision making processes.
Uh. A counterfactual is “what would have been if...”, not about what may or may not come to pass. Your example is about possible futures (to kidnap or not to kidnap, or to pay ransom or not to pay ransom), so there is no issue there. From SEP:
Maybe you have a better example?
Remember the topic is *reductive* agency. The parents and the kinapper are all made of atoms. For our purposes, they’re deterministic. They will, in fact, only take one of the “possible” actions. The other actions are counterfactual.
I don’t think you are using the standard definition of a counterfactual. Future possibilities are never counterfactual. Unless MIRI has its own non-standard definition.
At a guess, those in favor of counterfactuals hold that the sense in which multiple things can happen (in the future) is also the sense in which counterfactuals could have happened.
Would a quantum random number generator that is as likely to output “0” as “1″ help? (It seems like there is a meaningful sense for such things that “this set up has a prior probability distribution which exists”—as opposed to a (deterministic) coin flip.).
I understand that this is a tempting thought, but ultimately counterproductive. Future, whether set or not, is yet unknown. You can also evaluate probabilities of events that are unknown to you but have already happened. What I find useless is the reasoning of the type “I know that X happened, but what if it didn’t, all else being equal?”
Let’s, think of a use for it. For instance, if an outcome depends on a decision you made, considering what would have happened if you made a different decision can help refine your decision making processes.
“Considering what may happen in a similar setup in the future if you make a different decision can help refine your decision making processes. ” FTFY
… Prompted by what did or didn’t work on the past.
Yep, definitely based on what worked and what didn’t. But future-oriented, not past-oriented.