Against Self-Location

Emily Adlam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.05259

2024-09-09

Abstract:I distinguish between pure self-locating credences and superficially self-locating credences, and argue that there is never any rationally compelling way to assign pure self-locating credences. I first argue that from a practical point of view, pure self-locating credences simply encode our pragmatic goals, and thus pragmatic rationality does not dictate how they must be set. I then use considerations motivated by Bertrand's paradox to argue that the indifference principle and other popular constraints on self-locating credences fail to be a priori principles of epistemic rationality, and I critique some approaches to deriving self-locating credences based on analogies to non-self-locating cases. Finally, I consider the implications of this conclusion for various applications of self-locating probabilities in scientific contexts, arguing that it may undermine certain kinds of reasoning about multiverses, the simulation hypothesis, and Boltzmann brains.

History and Philosophy of Physics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is the problem of rational constraints on self - locating credences. The author Emily Adlam distinguishes between pure self - locating credences and superficially self - locating credences, and argues that there is no rationally mandatory way to assign pure self - locating credences under any circumstances. Specifically, the author believes that:

1. **From the perspective of practical rationality**: Pure self - locating credences merely encode our practical goals, so practical rationality does not prescribe how they should be set. For example, in the case of betting, the assignment of pure self - locating credences only reflects an individual's practical goals, and these goals may vary from person to person.

2. **From the perspective of epistemic rationality**: The Principle of Indifference and other popular constraints on self - locating credences are not a priori epistemic rationality principles. The author supports this view by analogy with Bertrand's paradox, pointing out that these principles are not applicable in some cases.

3. **Criticism of the analogy strategy**: Some researchers attempt to derive self - locating credences by analogy with non - self - locating situations, but the author believes that these analogies have crucial inconsistencies and therefore cannot be used as effective derivation methods.

4. **Implications for scientific applications**: The author discusses the implications of this conclusion for various scientific applications, especially in areas such as multiverse theories, simulation hypothesis, and Boltzmann brains. She believes that if there is no rationally mandatory way to assign pure self - locating credences, then some reasoning in these areas may be challenged.

In summary, the core issue of this paper is to question whether pure self - locating credences are objective enough to support their use in scientific reasoning. The author believes that pure self - locating credences are highly subjective and are not subject to any other rational constraints except for the requirement of probability consistency. This may lead to the need to re - evaluate existing reasoning methods when dealing with issues such as the multiverse and the simulation hypothesis.