Post by displayname on Oct 30, 2014 1:46:33 GMT
When Perry is talks about how causality is set and that premonition does not effect the overall outcome he is referring to:
A.) the fundamental fact that in order to violate causality to avoid consequence and establish free will, one would need a simulator that can simulate everything the universe, including itself, and that all systems that existed when he made the quote were nowhere near a quantum computer or other, more compact simulation devices.
my opinion: an excellent point. I would like to point out that while the search for free will should never be abandoned, it will always be incalculably valuable to come to peace with your own existence as a causality derived being.
B.) The fact that he, the fictional persona that Truman Capote wrote about after extensively interviewing the real Perry Smith, has become sentient and wishes not to be killed at the end of the book. Because it is clear that causality cannot be violated with the technology level of the setting of the story in which he has been injected, the fictional persona of Perry Smith that Truman Capote created tries to inform the author that he is aware that he is a character in a book by referencing foreshadowing, and how in many fictional tales, foreshadowing and prophesy always fulfill themselves. Truman Capote kills him anyway. Every time a book of "In Cold Blood" is read, a cry goes out and is silenced. This is what happens when we make gods of men.
my opinion: it was a good try. Too bad it didn't work. I definitely agree with the fictional sentient Perry Smith that Truman Capote created and then butchered. If I was a self-aware fictional character I'd be a bit less subtle.
A.) the fundamental fact that in order to violate causality to avoid consequence and establish free will, one would need a simulator that can simulate everything the universe, including itself, and that all systems that existed when he made the quote were nowhere near a quantum computer or other, more compact simulation devices.
my opinion: an excellent point. I would like to point out that while the search for free will should never be abandoned, it will always be incalculably valuable to come to peace with your own existence as a causality derived being.
B.) The fact that he, the fictional persona that Truman Capote wrote about after extensively interviewing the real Perry Smith, has become sentient and wishes not to be killed at the end of the book. Because it is clear that causality cannot be violated with the technology level of the setting of the story in which he has been injected, the fictional persona of Perry Smith that Truman Capote created tries to inform the author that he is aware that he is a character in a book by referencing foreshadowing, and how in many fictional tales, foreshadowing and prophesy always fulfill themselves. Truman Capote kills him anyway. Every time a book of "In Cold Blood" is read, a cry goes out and is silenced. This is what happens when we make gods of men.
my opinion: it was a good try. Too bad it didn't work. I definitely agree with the fictional sentient Perry Smith that Truman Capote created and then butchered. If I was a self-aware fictional character I'd be a bit less subtle.