[ExI] Open Individualism

[efc at swisscows.email]

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024, Jason Resch via extropy-chat wrote:

>       Could you expand here? My interpretation would be that all future events
>       have a probability of occuring and are validated by them actually
>       occuring. But this is not what you mean I think.
> 
> Let's define the absolutist instrumentalist as someone who only
> accepts and believes in *only* such things that they can observe
> directly, either with their senses or their instruments.

This is one definition out of many. Also note, that
since instruments are ultimately dependent on senses, I think your
definition could exclude instruments, since instruments give rise to
sense impressions.

> Then consider: each of us is only ever aware of some instantaneous
> point in time, a single moment of the present, perhaps containing some
> recollection of past memories.

Without time and awareness of time, thought is not possible since
thought is a sequence of events, so it seems to me that this collapses
into some solipsism.

> To thrive in the world, we have to make (and act according to),
> theories about reality that we cannot prove with our senses. In this

If we require a 100% foundation of everything, we end up as solipsists,
which no one who argues about it seriously beliefs. The fact of arguing
in favour of the position weakens it of itself.

The best foundation we have is materialism, what we can see, experience,
and the best way to knowledge that we have is science.

Now here's the thing. Other ways may be possible, other worlds may be
possible, but I'd say that it's fair to shift the burden of proof onto
them.

So nothing can be proven with 100% certainty, as you say, but we have a
pretty close second place in the form of the assumption that we exist
and matter exists and science and so on.

> will experience it. This assumptions is important for our survival,
> but it doesn't mean it is true. Empty individualism is consistent with

We have no proof to the contrary. At least no proof which has been
accepted by the world at large.

> The absolutist instrumentalist is forced to assume no more than empty
> individualism.

But I think we're getting back to old MWI-ground. I'll stop for now, and
let's see if someone else will jump back in and I hope I'll learn
something new. =)

Best regards, 
Daniel


> 
> Jason 
> 
> 
>
>       Best regards,
>       Daniel
>       _______________________________________________
>       extropy-chat mailing list
>       extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>       http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> 
> 
>