A little bit of both, I suppose. One needs to define “harm” in a way which is true to the spirit of the prisoner’s dilemma. The underlying question is whether one can set up a prisoner’s dilemma between a past version of the self and a future version of the self.
Ok, so you are saying that one can harm Isaac Newton today by going out and obstructing the advance of science?
Yep. I’ll bite that bullet until shown a good reason I should not.
I suppose that’s the nub of the disagreement. I don’t believe it’s possible to do anything in 2010 to harm Isaac Newton.
Is this a disagreement about metaphysics, or about how best to define the word ‘harm’?
A little bit of both, I suppose. One needs to define “harm” in a way which is true to the spirit of the prisoner’s dilemma. The underlying question is whether one can set up a prisoner’s dilemma between a past version of the self and a future version of the self.