You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

MrMind comments on Open thread, Sep. 14 - Sep. 20, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: MrMind 14 September 2015 07:10AM

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

Comments (192)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: MrMind 18 September 2015 06:57:28AM 0 points [-]

Trying to assign the same degree of belief to infinitely many mutually exclusive options doesn't work.

Yeah, but the class of observers in the Doomsday argument is not infinite, usually one takes a small and a huge set, both finite. So in theory you could assign a uniform distribution.

For example, if you believe that universe has a limited amount of particles and a limited amount of time, that would put an (insanely generous) upper bound on the number of observers in this universe.

Exactly, and that's an assumption I'm always willing to make, to circumvent the problem of an infinite class of reference.

The problem though is not the cardinality of the set, it's rather the uniformity of the distribution, which I think is what is implied by the word 'randomness' in S(S|I)A, because I feel intuitively it shouldn't be so, due to the very definition of observer.