If the all-knowing entity predicts what you’re going to pick, and you pick B, it should’ve predicted that correctly and put 1 million dollars in the box. So why is there debate surrounding which box to pick, and why do some people think they should pick both boxes?
In: 1
Because picking both you’ll end up with at least 1000 dollars. If you pick only the million-or-nothing box, you risk not getting anything.
The prediction aspect just messes with your mind in that you want to use it to your advantage but you really can’t, as past events don’t guarantee future outcomes. So only by believing (I would call it irrationally) that the entity put money in it because it expected you to pick it, you would win it.
Because picking both you’ll end up with at least 1000 dollars. If you pick only the million-or-nothing box, you risk not getting anything.
The prediction aspect just messes with your mind in that you want to use it to your advantage but you really can’t, as past events don’t guarantee future outcomes. So only by believing (I would call it irrationally) that the entity put money in it because it expected you to pick it, you would win it.
Because picking both you’ll end up with at least 1000 dollars. If you pick only the million-or-nothing box, you risk not getting anything.
The prediction aspect just messes with your mind in that you want to use it to your advantage but you really can’t, as past events don’t guarantee future outcomes. So only by believing (I would call it irrationally) that the entity put money in it because it expected you to pick it, you would win it.
Here’s another way of looking at it: if the predictor has predicted that you will only pick B, then you are better off picking both. If the predictor has predicted that you will pick both, then you are still better off picking both. So in all possible circumstances, you’re better off picking both.
And here’s another way of looking at it: if the predictor really is so good at predicting what you will do, then clearly you don’t have much capacity to make a choice in the first place.
> So why is there debate surrounding which box to pick
It’s partly due to ambiguity in how the paradox is stated, and partly down to different views about how causality and free will work.
Here’s another way of looking at it: if the predictor has predicted that you will only pick B, then you are better off picking both. If the predictor has predicted that you will pick both, then you are still better off picking both. So in all possible circumstances, you’re better off picking both.
And here’s another way of looking at it: if the predictor really is so good at predicting what you will do, then clearly you don’t have much capacity to make a choice in the first place.
> So why is there debate surrounding which box to pick
It’s partly due to ambiguity in how the paradox is stated, and partly down to different views about how causality and free will work.
Here’s another way of looking at it: if the predictor has predicted that you will only pick B, then you are better off picking both. If the predictor has predicted that you will pick both, then you are still better off picking both. So in all possible circumstances, you’re better off picking both.
And here’s another way of looking at it: if the predictor really is so good at predicting what you will do, then clearly you don’t have much capacity to make a choice in the first place.
> So why is there debate surrounding which box to pick
It’s partly due to ambiguity in how the paradox is stated, and partly down to different views about how causality and free will work.
Latest Answers