What's the Annabel Crisis? On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 7:20 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3854 > (This document is informational only and contains no game actions). > > =============================== CFJ 3854 =============================== > > If a player dies unbeknownst to all persons involved in Agora, e > is still a person. > > ========================================================================== > > Caller: ATMunn > > Judge: Murphy > Judgement: DISMISS > > ========================================================================== > > History: > > Called by ATMunn: 22 Jun 2020 01:59:55 > Assigned to Murphy: 22 Jun 2020 14:47:24 > Judged DISMISS by Murphy: 28 Jun 2020 18:32:18 > > ========================================================================== > > Caller's Arguments: > > Rule 869 states that > Any organism that is generally capable of freely originating and > communicating independent thoughts and ideas is a person. Rules to > the contrary notwithstanding, no other entities are persons. > > If someone dies, e is no longer capable of freely originating and > communicating independent thoughts and ideas; therefore, e is not a > person. FALSE. > > ...but if nobody knows that e died, then e has to still be a person. We > can't assume without proof that anyone is dead and declare em not a > person. So PARADOXICAL? Maybe? > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Gratuitous Arguments by R. Lee: > > https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3411 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Judge Murphy's Arguments: > > Per the precedent of my previous judgement of CFJ 3411, I still do not > consider myself qualified to judge whether a dead once-a-person still > exists in some sense that would qualify as "person" here. > > It seems reasonable to assume that their no-longer-functional body > doesn't qualify, and neither does the portion of anyone else's mind that > continues to roughly emulate what their mind was like (fails the > "independent" part). > > But if their mind remains directly functional in some other sense, then > arguably that should still qualify as an "organism", and by definition > it would still be capable of freely originating independent thoughts and > ideas, and presumably also communicating them. (To whom? Can we > communicate with members of an uncontacted tribe, for instance? Surely > not within reasonable effort.) > > If someone dies but we don't know about it, then we simply remain in > Platonic error until/unless we implement an independent fix, similar to > the Annabel Crisis. It would be a good idea to implement such a fix here > (hopefully) well ahead of it actually becoming relevant. > > DISMISS. > > ========================================================================== > >
