Math and Logic Puzzles: Redux

[Tazaro]

egosearchbookmark

[Tazaro]

Bump;
Before clicking the following link, follow direction #1. https://www.theguardian.com/science/ale ... are-you-on

Direction #1) Without reading the comments therein that preload your mind, Skip down to "

The problem

" in the text at the linked article and read the information until you get to "So, what do you choose?"

Direction #2) Choose whether you side with the philosophy dude A or dude B who opine further down in the article's text--"the philosophy dude"s being Dr. Arif Ahmed or Dr. David Edmonds, who are each giving advice on what you should do about your dilemma. Reason thoughtfully about this kooky conundrum you have found yourself in, supply yourself with a case that's tight enough for you to be convinced by it, and then discuss why you side with the position you side with.

[Tazaro]

there is a sense in which we can recognize the superior utility of ending up choosing the one box, but I have an explanation for why this doesn't actually come from the "math" value of your DECISION. The nature of this problem suggests a different origin of this supposed utility, and this addition to the context negates the validity of appealing to "expected utility" as a basis for determining your best option. Please read what I have written.
If the predicting entity ends up having made the right prediction, then given the awesome predicting power of the genie that suggests you had no real chance to oppose his prediction... we can conclude that you had virtually no real choice--nor egress via decision-making--to cause Mr. Right / Mr. G'Nie(Nius) to be in error; that is to say, for all the talk about wielding the versatile instrument of human will, you could not escape the fate that corresponds to the inner truth contained in the erstwhile unopened mystery box. That would mean the whole situation was simply an (approximately) inevitable gift to you and not a game of efficacious decision-making (fleshing this out with more description, we can say that a weird conceptual object is in the thick of things with the salient trait that it "impersonates" expected utility; it appears to be the case that, whatever its formal name could be, it is NOT maximized by your opting to exclusively choose the one box--so it is not the the so-called expected utility--but is established by the predictor's judgment w.r.t. whether to fill the mystery box or not, in essence signifying your fate in advance )... THUS all of us should disregard the expected utility argument and avail ourselves of the remaining, second perspective in service to our reasoning out how both our guesswork in this decision puzzle and our genie's magically powered guesswork can coexist/interrelate in a meaningful framing of this puzzle. An interesting thing to ask here is this question: is it possible to upgrade FROM sleepwalking through this conundrum, our guessing game conundrum, and being merely satisfied with whatever happens at the end TO the weal of realizing an unambiguously optimal single solution (either the option to one-box or to two-box) in the event that one presents itself as potentially of efficacious use to us in the course of this two boxes game?
Insofar as there is a bona fide chance to actually "play the game" in terms of the puzzle's context, which would be the chance that the magical entity will be wrong, there consequently is a rather simple but crucial detail to notice. The auspicious element of fallibility in this equation of guesses and magic makes possible a situation in which acting according to the dominance perspective wins out over the former perspective as the "right" strategy. Just in case there is an actual game in which you can genuinely make and carry out a decision, the right one is to take both boxes. A successful framing of this puzzle seems finally to be at hand when all the preceding text (which I forged) is understood as holding key insight into the mysterious paradox and is trusted as a proper source of its exact means of resolution. This is thanks to the perfect fit of our forged key into this infamous treasure chest of paradox, our money-offering thought experiment that has entertained us.