= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wedrifid comments on The Dilemma: Science or Bayes? - 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 (185)
Actually the many-world interpretation misses something very important, which is a kind of theory of mind.
Why does my consciousness follow only one world and at what point do different worlds separate ? Why am I not conscious of the many-worlds but only of one world ?
The one-world interpretation does not fail at this point. It seems to me that many-worlds adepts are so hypnotised by the beauty of mathematics that they forget what reality we have to account for...
Rather it is consciousness that confuses people.
Dear Eliezer, Could you pick a simpler example of a "traditional" style theory that has been replaced by "Bayesian" interpretation which is more efficient while having equal or better fit with reality. It seems that conjoining two difficult objects in the same example lessens the chance of anyone really getting the point, i..e quantum mechanics and proper epistemology considerations are not simple subjects. I must confess that I get the idea of the post but I cant really get a grip on the reasoning. Thanks, Dispose.
How about E.T. Jaynes's "Clearing Up Mysteries - The Original Goal"?
Precisely, the conscious experience is everything we have to account for at the end.