[extropy-chat] Doomsday argument

George Dvorsky george at betterhumans.com
Mon Oct 16 14:26:41 UTC 2006


You and I have gone back and forth many times on the topic of the SSA, 
and we clearly have differing perspectives on the matter. One thing I 
want to make clear, however, is that the SSA does not indicate the 
*truth*, merely what you should probabilistically *assume* given 
insufficient data. I will admit that it is at best a philosophical mind 
exercise, but it's one that, imo, offers some profound insight as where 
we find ourselves within certain reference classes.


Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 10:27:20PM -0400, George Dvorsky wrote:
>> Self-sampling most definitely gives strength to the Doomsday Argument. 
> I find it interesting that so many subscribe to the SSA religiously.
> You don't have any degrees of freedom at all in this experiment
> of self-observation.
>> The fact that I find myself as an individual in pre-Singularity 
> Wherever you go, there you are. You're not an omniscient
> external observer, randomly picking items from the same
> reference class. You're only observing an infinitely self-biased
> sample of one: yourself.
>> existence is a very troubling observation, particularly given the 
> I only find it troubling, that people are taking number games
> religiously.
>> assumption that there should be far more post-Singularity individuals 
>> than in a pre-Singularity civ. It also indicates that the most probable 
>> observation of a civ is pre-Singularity and not post, a possible 
>> indicator that there are no post-Singularity civs.
> Only if you build on invalid premises.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list