# Fw: Michael Anissimov's 'Shock Level Analysis'

From: ben goertzel (ben@goertzel.org)
Date: Fri Jan 18 2002 - 09:48:00 MST

Hello polysync,

You have mixed up quotations from me and somebody else,

> > Given this fact, the assumption that there is only 1 reality is just as
> > ungrounded as the assumption that there are many. Each of the
approximations
> > to reality that reason makes, only narrows down the space of possible
> > realities a bit, it doesn't show that ony one true reality lies within
this
> > narrowed- down space.
>
> Are you saying there's a finite (or infinite) number of realities, and
we're
> randomly (or even orderly) cycling between them? And supposing that were
true,
> what stops me from saying "the only One True Reality" is nothing more than
this
> "set of sub-realities"?

I was saying here that WE JUST DON'T KNOW whether there is one true
reality or not. (Maybe the post-Singularity supermind will figure it out
... or dismiss
the question as irrelevant blather...)

The difference between a single reality and a set of realities, in my view,
is logical
consistency. If X occurs in reality A, but does not occur in reality B,
then I call
A and B different realities. Of course this could also be formalized in a
probabilistic
way... thus giving a probability estimate of the difference vs. sameness of
two
realities A and B.

> > A good metaphor, in my view are uncomputable numbers. You can never
express
> > an uncomputable number, never give a real example of one. Yet you can
> > construct a series of rational approximations to one, and know that
you're
> > getting closer & closer...
>
> I can't predict random numbers or the next roll of perfect dice either,
but I
> think I understand their One True Reality.

Well, far be it from me to dispute your delusion ... everyone is welcome to
their
own religion as far as I'm concerned ;->

>
> > Even so, that does not give "you" the right to exercise intolerance of
people
> > who are "wrong" (by your personal definition).
>
> So you're tolerant of the person who says the 6-sided die can sometimes
roll a
> seven?

Here you are responding to a quote from someone other than myself.

To answer your question for myself, anyway: I certainly *try* to be tolerant
of
people who believe things I think are dumb, such as astrology. Being an
imperfect
human being, I don't always succeed. I derive a certain amount of humility
from
the knowledge of the extreme finitude of my own mind, though perhaps not as
much as I should. In other words, no matter
what my wife might say, I don't *actually* believe I'm always right ;>

Also, even though I have a generally tolerant *attitude*, when a practical
decision
has to be made I naturally go with my own beliefs rather than a weighted
average
of everybody else's!!!

-- Ben G

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT