Yeah, I think this is a good argument to give people an intuition, but it doesn’t answer the question of “OK, but if you are in the situation, what do you do and why?”. FDT supporters (of which I am one, to be clear) do need to answer that.
I though the answer was “assume you’re simulated and follow FDT to save real-you the trouble of ever getting into this situation in real life”. Out of the all arguments to take the bomb this is the only one I’ve ever heard which I can at least understand where it’s coming from.
If that is not the FDT response then, I guess I don’t know why you’d ever really blow yourself up. I did read the whole post, including rereading the example against just now.
But what I got from it was mostly the insight that FDT kind of answers a different question than CDT, in that it’s goal is to shape what situations you end up in, not necessarily how to get the best result out of a given situation.
Thanks for the post—it gave me plenty of food for thought!
On the object level: IMHO, asking the question “OK, but if you are in the situation, what do you do?” follows from an implicit rejection of the scenario’s embeddedness — and without embeddedness, FDT doesn’t make sense. I’ve written a 3-min post elaborating on this.
Yeah, I think this is a good argument to give people an intuition, but it doesn’t answer the question of “OK, but if you are in the situation, what do you do and why?”. FDT supporters (of which I am one, to be clear) do need to answer that.
I though the answer was “assume you’re simulated and follow FDT to save real-you the trouble of ever getting into this situation in real life”. Out of the all arguments to take the bomb this is the only one I’ve ever heard which I can at least understand where it’s coming from.
If that is not the FDT response then, I guess I don’t know why you’d ever really blow yourself up. I did read the whole post, including rereading the example against just now.
But what I got from it was mostly the insight that FDT kind of answers a different question than CDT, in that it’s goal is to shape what situations you end up in, not necessarily how to get the best result out of a given situation.
Thanks for the post—it gave me plenty of food for thought!
On the object level: IMHO, asking the question “OK, but if you are in the situation, what do you do?” follows from an implicit rejection of the scenario’s embeddedness — and without embeddedness, FDT doesn’t make sense. I’ve written a 3-min post elaborating on this.