Subject: Re: Simplex
From: McAllister <email@example.com>
Date: Friday, September 11, 1998 08:39:23
>A citizen is a thingie. There is a citizen known as Tyrrell McAllister in
>the game Simplex. There is also a person known as Tyrrell McAllister that
>I will probably see tonite which does not exist in Simplex. The former is
>required to recognize the rules and things which occur from the rules (like
>my actions), the latter is not. The latter can has any psychological state
>he likes so long as citizen Tyrrell complies with the rules and things
>which occur due to them.
>Tom Mueller :)
1) The entity ('entity' is such a more dignified denotation than 'thingie')
Tyrrell, as I understand the current rule set, is not compeled to recognize
any entity or action other than laws and propositions.
2) Law #115 provides wide latitude for other actions, but the rule set
provides no system of gauging the reletive precedence of actions, or
whether they can have retro-active effects, etc. Therefore, I could
hypotheticlly make an action declaring myself "The ultimate fount of all
that is Truth", and define this thingie, "The ultimate fount of all that is
Truth", as having retro-active power and precedence over all other actions,
including (and especially) those which say they have precedence over this.
Of course other actions could say they have precedence over mine, and
nullify it, but mine could say the same about theirs. For laws, there is
an ellaborate system of determining precedence, and such disputes can be
settled effectively, however, no such system exists for actions. This is
way I choose to simply ignore certain types of actions, rather than make a
counter-action of some kind.