FDT says stand there and bare your throat in order to make this situation not occur, but that fails to track the point in logical time that the agent actually is placed into at the start of a game where the bear has already been released.
That confuses chronological priority with logical priority. The decision to release the bear is chronologically prior to the decision of the agent to not slice their throat, but logically posterior to it—in other words, it’s not the case that they won’t slice their throat because the bear is released. Rather, is it the case that the bear is released because they won’t slice their throat.
If the agent did slice their throat, the emperor would’ve predicted that and wouldn’t have released the bear.
Whether the bear is released or not is, despite it being a chronologically earlier event, predicated on the action of the agent.
(I’m intentionally ignoring the probabilistic character of the problem because the disagreement lies in missing how FDT works, not in the difference between the predictor being perfect or imperfect.)
That confuses chronological priority with logical priority. The decision to release the bear is chronologically prior to the decision of the agent to not slice their throat, but logically posterior to it—in other words, it’s not the case that they won’t slice their throat because the bear is released. Rather, is it the case that the bear is released because they won’t slice their throat.
If the agent did slice their throat, the emperor would’ve predicted that and wouldn’t have released the bear.
Whether the bear is released or not is, despite it being a chronologically earlier event, predicated on the action of the agent.
(I’m intentionally ignoring the probabilistic character of the problem because the disagreement lies in missing how FDT works, not in the difference between the predictor being perfect or imperfect.)