In other articles, you have discussed the notion that, in an infinite universe, there exist with probability 1 identical copies of me some 10^(10^29) {span} away. You then (correctly, I think) demonstrate the absurdity of declaring that one of them in particular is ‘really you’ and another is a ‘mere copy’.
When you say “3^^^^3 people”, you are presenting me two separate concepts:
Individual entities which are each “people”.
A set {S} of these entities, of which there are 3^^^^3 members.
Now, at this point, I have to ask myself: “what is the probability that {S} exists?”
By which I mean, what is the probability that there are 3^^^^3 unique configurations, each of which qualifies as a self-aware, experiencing entity with moral weight, without reducing to an “effective simulation” of another entity already counted in {S}?
Vs. what is the probability that the total cardinality of unique configurations that each qualify as self-aware, experiencing entities with moral weight, is < 3^^^^3?
Because if we’re going to juggle Bayesian probabilities here, at some point that has to get stuck in the pipe and smoked, too.
Well, let’s think about this mathematically.
In other articles, you have discussed the notion that, in an infinite universe, there exist with probability 1 identical copies of me some 10^(10^29) {span} away. You then (correctly, I think) demonstrate the absurdity of declaring that one of them in particular is ‘really you’ and another is a ‘mere copy’.
When you say “3^^^^3 people”, you are presenting me two separate concepts:
Individual entities which are each “people”.
A set {S} of these entities, of which there are 3^^^^3 members.
Now, at this point, I have to ask myself: “what is the probability that {S} exists?”
By which I mean, what is the probability that there are 3^^^^3 unique configurations, each of which qualifies as a self-aware, experiencing entity with moral weight, without reducing to an “effective simulation” of another entity already counted in {S}?
Vs. what is the probability that the total cardinality of unique configurations that each qualify as self-aware, experiencing entities with moral weight, is < 3^^^^3?
Because if we’re going to juggle Bayesian probabilities here, at some point that has to get stuck in the pipe and smoked, too.