<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Conundrum: Two Boxes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.shakespeareteacher.com/blog/archives/167/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.shakespeareteacher.com/blog/archives/167</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://www.shakespeareteacher.com/blog/archives/167#comment-935</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2007 01:13:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shakespeareteacher.com/blog/archives/167#comment-935</guid>
		<description>Okay, let me give you my own take on the problem.

First of all, I would actually drink Kavka's Toxin.  It's the only way to form an intent to do so.  No matter how afraid I am, no matter how bad it smells, no matter how sick I'll get, I have to force myself to drink it.  That much seems clear.  So by that same logic, it seems to make sense to choose Box B alone to collect the million dollars.

But Newcomb's Problem is more complicated than that.  It's not a matter of finding some mental process to form an intent to choose Box B.  Nobody's asking me to.  The only question is whether I have the qualities and internal makeup to make one choice or the other.  These factors are entirely out of my control.

Based on the premise, there seem to be two kinds of people - those who take the two boxes and those who take Box B.  The Nozick quote reinforces the idea that this aspect of it may actually be true.  The premise also implies that there is a way of identifying these two types, even if it's beyond human capacity to do so.  And whichever one of those kinds of people I am, I am that right now.  I am that when being analyzed, and I am that when I make my choice.  And the first time I'm actually being asked to make a decision is after it has any power to affect the outcome.  That's what makes it different from Kavka's Toxin.  If all we had to do was form an intent to choose B, it would be a variation of the same problem.

So why would anyone choose Box B alone?  For that, we turn to John Calvin, the 16th century Protestant reformer.

Calvin takes the ideas of Martin Luther to their logical extreme.  Luther said that God has already chosen who would be saved and who would not.  So good works were unnecessary, only faith was required.  Calvin noted that if God has already made his decision, and nothing we can do change it, then not even faith is required. Those who are already saved would also be granted faith and its manifestations, and it's not something we have any control over.  You may already be a winner!

You'd think that this philosophy would have led to an anything-goes mentality, but it didn't.  Calvinists all wanted to believe that they were among those already saved, so they acted that way.

Look, I'll be honest with you.  I want that million dollars.  I have big plans for it.  If there are really two kinds of people, I want to be the kind of person who gets the million dollars.  And I can choose to be that kind of person by choosing Box B.

But that's not who I am.  When I'm standing there in front of the two boxes, I know that nothing's going to change about that Box B.  To choose it alone would be pure superstition.  And what's more, our alien friend knows that's who I am, and he has left Box B empty before I even got there.  I might as well get the thousand.

I'll take both boxes.  And I'll probably chicken out before I drink the toxin, too.  It wouldn't be the first promise to myself I've broken.  But I'm keeping the money because that was the deal.

Total thought experiment currency earned: $101,000

I wonder how much that is in Second Life money.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, let me give you my own take on the problem.</p>
<p>First of all, I would actually drink Kavka&#8217;s Toxin.  It&#8217;s the only way to form an intent to do so.  No matter how afraid I am, no matter how bad it smells, no matter how sick I&#8217;ll get, I have to force myself to drink it.  That much seems clear.  So by that same logic, it seems to make sense to choose Box B alone to collect the million dollars.</p>
<p>But Newcomb&#8217;s Problem is more complicated than that.  It&#8217;s not a matter of finding some mental process to form an intent to choose Box B.  Nobody&#8217;s asking me to.  The only question is whether I have the qualities and internal makeup to make one choice or the other.  These factors are entirely out of my control.</p>
<p>Based on the premise, there seem to be two kinds of people - those who take the two boxes and those who take Box B.  The Nozick quote reinforces the idea that this aspect of it may actually be true.  The premise also implies that there is a way of identifying these two types, even if it&#8217;s beyond human capacity to do so.  And whichever one of those kinds of people I am, I am that right now.  I am that when being analyzed, and I am that when I make my choice.  And the first time I&#8217;m actually being asked to make a decision is after it has any power to affect the outcome.  That&#8217;s what makes it different from Kavka&#8217;s Toxin.  If all we had to do was form an intent to choose B, it would be a variation of the same problem.</p>
<p>So why would anyone choose Box B alone?  For that, we turn to John Calvin, the 16th century Protestant reformer.</p>
<p>Calvin takes the ideas of Martin Luther to their logical extreme.  Luther said that God has already chosen who would be saved and who would not.  So good works were unnecessary, only faith was required.  Calvin noted that if God has already made his decision, and nothing we can do change it, then not even faith is required. Those who are already saved would also be granted faith and its manifestations, and it&#8217;s not something we have any control over.  You may already be a winner!</p>
<p>You&#8217;d think that this philosophy would have led to an anything-goes mentality, but it didn&#8217;t.  Calvinists all wanted to believe that they were among those already saved, so they acted that way.</p>
<p>Look, I&#8217;ll be honest with you.  I want that million dollars.  I have big plans for it.  If there are really two kinds of people, I want to be the kind of person who gets the million dollars.  And I can choose to be that kind of person by choosing Box B.</p>
<p>But that&#8217;s not who I am.  When I&#8217;m standing there in front of the two boxes, I know that nothing&#8217;s going to change about that Box B.  To choose it alone would be pure superstition.  And what&#8217;s more, our alien friend knows that&#8217;s who I am, and he has left Box B empty before I even got there.  I might as well get the thousand.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll take both boxes.  And I&#8217;ll probably chicken out before I drink the toxin, too.  It wouldn&#8217;t be the first promise to myself I&#8217;ve broken.  But I&#8217;m keeping the money because that was the deal.</p>
<p>Total thought experiment currency earned: $101,000</p>
<p>I wonder how much that is in Second Life money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
