= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TimS comments on Stupid Questions Open Thread Round 3 - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (208)
Doesn't the paper cited here on acausal romance imply that gains from acausal trade are incoherent?
The fact that I can imagine someone who can imagine exactly me doesn't seem like it implies that I can make material gains by acting in reference to that inaccessible other.
What am I misunderstanding?
That's the joke. The whole paper is a "Modest Proposal" style satire.
It's designed to tear down modal realism by taking it to the most absurd extreme. I also detected hints of playing on the Ontological Argument for the existence of God.
Thanks for that explanation of the paper. Is acausal trade supposed to rely on modal realism, or are they distinct?