Let's assume someone is looking for potemkin villages. He knows about several characteristics that fall under the aspect "potemkin" (for definition please use search engine). He is travelling the world for potemkin villages. And somewhere he finds a village that shows aspects of "potemkin village" (philosophical zombie village). And he sais it is a potemkin village. But it is not. It is maybe just a village which has been left for some reasons he does not know about.
The P-Zombie Village and potemkin villages are both in the same physical world but not the same places. All property facts of the P-Zombie-Village are similar to those of potemkin villages. It contains every characteristic which you would expect from a potemkin village. The conscious experience is very similar. One can conceive of a place which is characteristical indistinguishable from a place one was looking for.
The possible distinction would f.e be to know about the purpose why this place was built. To find out about the purpose he had to find for example a witness (a person who knows about the true purpose).
What else strategies can you imagine to find out the truth?
In Biology we can never find a witness as evolution is deductive and has no purpose. Thus in researching any deductive systems (as compared to inductive systems) we face a similar problem. How do we handle it? Typically we can do these things: 1. burn the village, see what impacts this action will have on the observable surroundings 2. build a similar village next to it, see what impacts this action will have on the observable surroundings. so on so fourth.
at the end, we will have to accept that many things do not have an active purpose in deductive systems. they simply came to be randomly and didn't get in the way and were not eliminated.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy