Allan_Crossman comments on Can Counterfactuals Be True? - Less Wrong

13 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 24 July 2008 04:40AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (46)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Allan_Crossman 24 July 2008 09:04:23PM 1 point [-]

In more detail, suppose there was in fact no conspiracy and Oswald was a lone, self-motivated individual. It might still turn out that the simplest way to imagine what would have happened if Oswald had not killed Kennedy, would be to imagine that there was in fact a conspiracy, and they found someone else, who did the job in the same way. That would arguably be the change which would minimize total forward and backward alterations to the timeline.

Hal: what you describe is called "backtracking" in the philosophical literature. It's not usually seen as legitimate, I think mostly because it doesn't correspond to what a sentence like "if X had occurred, then Y would have occurred" actually means in normal usage.

I mean, it's a really weird analysis that says "there really was no conspiracy, so if Oswald hadn't shot Kennedy, there would have been a conspiracy, and Kennedy would have been shot." :)