The argument for one-boxing is that you aren’t entirely sure you understand physics, but you know Omega has a really good track record—so good that it is more likely that your understanding of physics is false than that you can falsify Omega’s prediction. This is a strict reliance on empirical observations as opposed to abstract reason: count up how often Omega has been right and compute a prior.
Eh? I’m pretty sure I’d still be a one-boxer if I’d completely understand physics. I one-box because of Omega and I being subjunctively dependent on my decision procedure.
Eh? I’m pretty sure I’d still be a one-boxer if I’d completely understand physics. I one-box because of Omega and I being subjunctively dependent on my decision procedure.