= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Alicorn comments on How to think like a quantum monadologist - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (266)
I don't think it's quite that simple. If a couple of four-year-olds encounter a chess set, and start moving the pieces around on the board, they might happen to take turns and make only legal "moves" until they got bored. I don't think they'd be playing chess. Similarly, if a couple of incompetent adults encounter a chess set and try to play chess, but because they aren't very smart or paying very close attention, about a quarter of their moves aren't actually legal, they're playing chess - they're just making mistakes in so doing.
The equivalence I'm proposing isn't between results or actions, but the causal springs of the actions. In your example, the children making legal chess moves are only doing so by luck - the causal chains determining their moves at no point involve the rules of chess - whereas the adults playing chess badly are doing so by a causal chain which includes the rules of chess. If you changed those rules, it would not change the children's moves, but it would change the adults'.