so you're switching back to saying it DOES work for n=2? — flannel jesus
Sometimes, but not always, as I keep saying. — Michael
When? Everything seems so vague right now. When does it work? What does Tommy have to see for it to work? — flannel jesus
I explained it above — Michael
Above doesn't include a specific scenario where it works. A specific scenario looks like "2 blue, 2 brown, 1 green". Does it work in that scenario, if the green eyed guy says nothing? If not that, what specific scenario does it work in? — flannel jesus
So just to be clear, this is you saying it works in the case of 2 blue 2 brown 1 green, correct? — flannel jesus
So if Tommy sees 1 blue, 2 brown, 1 green, Tommy can safely go to the boat on the second day knowing his eyes are blue. — flannel jesus
So I actually think this requires n>=4.
If I see 3 blue, 3 brown, and 1 green, then everyone knows that everyone knows that green sees blue and brown, and that allows the blues and browns to deduce their own eye colour — Michael
okay so you've completely bypassed all of unenlighteneds reasoning now. — flannel jesus
Is that n>=4? Are you talking from the perspective of a blue eyed person? Because that's only n=4 for blue, not for brown. — flannel jesus
so what do you deduce? What's the rest of it? You've only given half a story here. You see 3 blue, 3 brown, 1 green, green says nothing - what do you deduce and how? — flannel jesus
The exact same thing as if green were to say "I see blue". — Michael
So I actually think this requires n>=4. — Michael
It is sufficient that all blues know that all blues know that green sees blue.
I've told you, it's probably not as simple as there being some specific n — Michael
In the OP, that green sees blue and that green sees brown is shared knowledge that everyone knows, and that shared knowledge allows all blues and all greens to deduce their eye colour, even without green saying anything. — Michael
If the argument begins with "everyone can see that there are multiple blue and brown but no one says anything." What is the next step? — unenlightened
When the deduction begins, it has to begin with: 'if there is only one blue, and someone says "I see blue" then they will know that they have blue eyes', and someone has to say it out loud, because in this case they have no idea that anyone sees blue because they are the only blue. And that is why the argument only runs when it is said out loud, not when everyone just knows from their own experience that in fact everyone can see blue. — unenlightened
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.