Let’s come back to what we’ve learned in Parfit teleportation experiment: Parfit-the-copy comes back to earth to know that Parfit-the-original has died six months after the teleportation. Parfit-the-copy decides to visit Anne, Parfit-the-original’s wife. After the obvious surprise of seeing Parfit-the-copy the wife reluctantly listens to his long exposition about how much he loves her and his children. Then, as she’s ready to shut the door she hears: “Would you live happily knowing that our children are orphans?”question #31 asks:
Knowing as she knows that this person in front of her is the copy of her deceased husband, is Parfit-the-copy’s claim compelling enough that Anne may “take him back?”To answer #31 correctly you need this background knowledge:
1- p. id. is not a necessary cond. for survival, 2- Po & Pc are psy. connected (meaning they are the same qualitatively, meaning they feel the same way), 3- Po, age 38, died of a heart condition, while Pc has lived in Mars for 6 months, 3- Po is married with two children. 4- Pc, which survived Po (by definition) comes back to earth to claim his children. In #31 I quote "a long exposition of how much he loves his children". In addition Pc wants "his wife back" (the scare quote indicates that she is not "really" his wife, but from the inside Pc doesn't feel that. He has a real desire!)
Some of you answered 31, choice b, which is wrong. Of many things that were said during our revision I remember these: "how do I know that wife takes Pc back?", "what if what you call 'compelling' is not enough for his wife to take him back?," what's compelling for you may not be compelling for me," and finally: "is this test fair?"
In response to the first three questions: I'm not saying Anne takes Pc back. All I ask you is to tell me whether the claim is "compelling enough" for her to take him back. Anne may take him back, but it depends of compelling reasons. As per the last point: "is the test fair," I hope that by answering the first points, I answer that one.
You realize that: it's true that it is possible that Po's wife will take Pc,(regardless of whether she finds his explanation compelling). To which you will retort: "well, it's equally possible that she won't take him back."
Precisely! This is why "compelling" becomes paramount.
To answer what's compelling, I propose to examine what's non-compelling: physically and behaviorally speaking. (a) Pc doesn't look like Po, (b) Pc doesn't act like Po, (c) when Anne cross-examines Pc about their previous history together, Pc gets it all wrong.
(a)-(c) are non-compelling reasons! On the other hand, if Pc resembles Po in all respects (except the numeric, (which Anne cannot notice, because Po's "number" disappears with Po's body), would you still say these are not compelling reasons?
This is what I'm after because it brings us back to the title of this post: Is #31 semantically obscure? (please, click the link and check definitions).
Instead of doing semantics, I'm going to take a look at how the IAC class answered #31. I propose three types: A, B, C respectively. Here are my findings (as per question #31):
(A type) out of 12 As in the class: 9 got it right, 3 got it wrong
(B type) out of 12 Bs in the class: 8 right, 4 wrong
(C type) out of 4 Cs in the class: 0 right, 4 wrong
We get a total of 17 rights vs. 11 wrong, that's 60% right.
Of the 11 wrong, 4 belong in the (C type), incidentally the latter also got question #30 wrong! Of the 11 who got 31 wrong, 8 also picked 30 wrong. Why is this relevant?
(1) It shows they didn't get how Pc is psychologically connected with Po. And why is it relevant? Because #30 actually informs #31!
(2) Consensus? out of 28 students, 17 right vs 11 wrong.
Best consensus? the (A type), which gets 31 right, by a 9 to 2 ratio!
After examining these numbers, would you still maintain that #31 is semantically obscure?
If you believe that, you have to find an argument to disprove my (1) and (2) above, that is:
60% consensus at #31, plus the (A type)'s strong agreement at #31, plus the #30-#31 connection (which only makes the (A type) stronger because their responses at 30 & 31 are more apt). In other words, getting both #30 & #31 right shows that the accuracy at #31 is the result of skills exhibited at #30.
the (A type) was not merely "guessing" #31: they knew it!
I doubt you (whoever you are) will find such argument.
Take care,
No comments:
Post a Comment