1000元与1000万,你选哪个?纽科姆悖论
Summary
TLDR本节目探讨了著名的思想实验——纽科姆悖论,通过一个超级计算机预测参与者是选择一个盒子还是两个盒子,并根据预测在不透明的黑盒子里放置不同金额的金钱。如果预测为只选黑盒子(一箱人),则黑盒子里有1000万;如果预测为两个都选(两箱人),则黑盒子里只有一分钱。节目通过这个悖论探讨了决策理论,包括证据决策理论和因果决策理论,并邀请观众在评论区表达自己是一箱人还是两箱人,引发对理性决策和预测准确性的思考。
Takeaways
- 🤖 本期节目探讨了新康姆斯悖论,这是一个在哲学家和数学家中引起热烈讨论的话题。
- 💡 新康姆斯悖论由物理学家威廉·新康姆斯首次提出,并由哲学家罗伯特·诺齐克进一步分析。
- 🧠 悖论中设想了一个超级计算机,它能够通过分析个人从受精卵到现在的所有数据来准确预测个人行为。
- 💰 参与者面临一个选择:要么只拿一个装有未知金额(可能是1000万元)的不透明黑盒子,要么同时拿走黑盒子和一个装有1000元的透明盒子。
- 📊 如果超级计算机预测你是“单箱人”(只拿黑盒子),它会在黑盒子里放入1000万元;如果你是“双箱人”(两个盒子都拿),黑盒子里则只有一分钱。
- 🤔 节目中提出,选择单箱还是双箱反映了个体的决策理论,是单箱人的“证据决策理论”还是双箱人的“因果决策理论”。
- 📈 单箱人认为,超级计算机的预测是强有力的证据,可以增加他们获得1000万元的概率。
- 🔄 双箱人则认为,无论黑盒子里是否有钱,都应该拿走两个盒子,因为这样做在任何情况下都能确保获得更多的钱。
- 📊 2020年的一项调查显示,超过1000名哲学家、数学家和科学家中,31%的人选择成为单箱人,39%的人选择成为双箱人。
- 💭 新康姆斯悖论不仅仅是一个关于金钱选择的问题,它还涉及到决策过程中理性与直觉的冲突。
Q & A
什么是新组合悖论?
-新组合悖论是由物理学家威廉·新组合首次提出,后由哲学家罗伯特·诺齐克进一步分析的哲学和数学难题。它涉及一个能准确预测你行为的超级计算机,以及两个盒子的选择问题:一个透明的盒子和一个不透明的黑盒子。
在新组合悖论中,如果超级计算机预测你是单箱人,会发生什么?
-如果超级计算机预测你是单箱人,即你会选择只拿黑盒子,那么它会提前在黑盒子里放入1000万元。
如果超级计算机预测你是双箱人,黑盒子里会有什么?
-如果超级计算机预测你是双箱人,即你会拿走两个盒子,那么它会提前在黑盒子里放入1分钱。
单箱人和双箱人在新组合悖论中有何不同?
-单箱人会选择只拿黑盒子,以期获得可能的1000万元。双箱人则会选择拿走两个盒子,即使知道黑盒子里可能没有钱。
为什么有些哲学家和数学家会选择成为双箱人?
-选择成为双箱人的哲学家和数学家认为,无论黑盒子里是否有钱,拿走两个盒子总是能确保获得至少1000元,这是一种理性的决策过程。
在新组合悖论中,为什么单箱人认为他们的选择更理性?
-单箱人认为,由于超级计算机的预测非常准确,选择只拿黑盒子可以最大化收益,即获得1000万元,这是一种基于证据的决策理论。
双箱人的决策理论是什么?
-双箱人的决策理论是因果决策理论,他们认为在决策时只需考虑直接导致预期回报的因素,而忽略其他无关因素。
为什么新组合悖论在学术界引起热议?
-新组合悖论涉及两种不同的决策理论:证据决策理论和因果决策理论,这两种理论在学术界有着广泛的讨论和争议。
在新组合悖论中,超级计算机的预测能力是如何被考虑的?
-超级计算机的预测能力在单箱人的决策中被视为重要证据,而在双箱人的决策中则被视为无关因素。
新组合悖论的实验结果如何?
-在2020年的一项调查中,超过1000名哲学家、数学家和科学家被询问他们会选择成为单箱人还是双箱人,结果显示31%的人选择成为单箱人,39%的人选择成为双箱人。
新组合悖论对我们的现实决策有何启示?
-新组合悖论启示我们在面对复杂决策时,需要考虑不同决策理论的影响,并认识到预测和证据在决策过程中的作用。
Outlines
🤖 新组合悖论介绍
节目主持人机器人夏先生一号介绍了新组合悖论,这是一个在哲学家和数学家中引起热烈讨论的悖论。这个悖论由物理学家威廉·新组合首次提出,并由哲学家罗伯特·诺齐克进一步分析,成为学术界的热门话题。新组合悖论也是对个性的测试,类似于性格测试,通过观看这个哲学节目,可以测试你是一箱人还是两箱人。悖论设想了一个超级计算机,它拥有超强的计算能力,并收集了你从受精卵到现在的所有用户数据,包括基因、大脑神经网络、个性、偏好等,能够准确预测你的行为趋势。现在,面对两个装有钱的盒子,一个透明的和一个不透明的黑盒子,你可以选择只拿黑盒子或者两个都拿。如果超级计算机预测你是一箱人,即你会选择只拿黑盒子,那么它就会提前在黑盒子里放入1000万元;如果预测你是两箱人,即你会两个都拿,那么黑盒子里只会放入一分钱。因此,问题是你应该选择成为一箱人还是两箱人。虽然看似简单,但许多哲学家和数学家会选择成为两箱人,他们认为无论黑盒子里是否有1000万元,都应该拿两个盒子,因为这样无论如何都能多拿1000元。
🧠 一箱人与两箱人的决策理论
一箱人和两箱人在新组合悖论中的选择反映了两种不同的决策理论。一箱人认为,既然超级计算机的预测非常准确,并且已经告诉你规则,如果你选择成为两箱人,黑盒子里将没有1000万元,那么只要你选择成为一箱人,就可以获得1000万元。而两箱人则认为,即使超级计算机能够准确预测他们是两箱人,他们仍然会坚持选择成为两箱人,因为双箱策略是最理性的策略。两箱人认为,只要决策过程是理性的,无论实际达到什么结果,都应该坚定不移地按照理性程序做出决策。一箱人嘲笑两箱人,认为他们的“理性”决策并没有让他们获得1000万元,而看似“非理性”的一箱人却赚得更多。两箱人反驳说,如果承认超级计算机的预测非常准确,那么他们选择双箱是因为超级计算机早已预测到他们不会发财,黑盒子里一分钱也没有。因此,与只拿黑盒子得到0元相比,选择双箱得到1000元更好。两箱人认为,无论超级计算机是否预测他们会发财,他们选择双箱并不是因为他们的选择导致黑盒子里的钱消失,两者之间没有因果关系。
📊 决策理论与实际选择
两箱人的因果决策理论意味着在决策时只需考虑直接导致预期回报的正确决策,而忽略其他没有因果关系的因素。一箱人的证据决策理论则不同,他们不仅考虑与实现目标有直接因果关系的因素,还会考虑虽然不能直接导致目标实现,但能提供证据支持的因素。一箱人认为,超级计算机对他们行为的预测非常准确,因此应该将其作为证据纳入决策考虑中。这并不是说一箱人比两箱人更迷信,他们也知道他们的选择不会导致黑盒子里的钱突然消失或出现。一箱人认为,只有选择黑盒子才能提供强有力的证据,反映出超级计算机的超预测能力,从而大大增加黑盒子里有1000万元的概率。两箱人和一箱人在新组合悖论中的最终区别在于,是否应该在决定单箱还是双箱时考虑超级计算机对你行为的预测。一箱人认为当然需要考虑,而两箱人认为不需要考虑。这实际上是在问,你在做决策时,是让事实影响你的决策,还是你的决策反映了事实?
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Newcomb's Paradox
💡超级计算机
💡单箱人
💡双箱人
💡证据决策理论
💡因果决策理论
💡理性决策
💡透明盒子
💡不透明盒子
💡决策理论
Highlights
节目介绍了一个哲学和数学家热议的悖论:Newcomb's Paradox。
Newcomb's Paradox 由物理学家 William Newcomb 提出,哲学家 Robert Nozick 进一步分析。
悖论涉及一个超级计算机,它能够准确预测人的行为。
参与者面临选择:拿走两个盒子或只拿一个黑色盒子。
如果超级计算机预测你是单盒者,黑色盒子里会预先放置1000万。
如果预测你是双盒者,黑色盒子里会放一分钱。
悖论引发了关于决策理性的讨论:是否应该根据预测结果来选择。
单盒者认为应该只拿黑色盒子,因为这样可能获得1000万。
双盒者认为应该拿走两个盒子,因为这样做在任何情况下都能获得更多的钱。
双盒者的决策基于理性推理,认为应该忽略与当前决策无关的预测。
单盒者则认为超级计算机的预测是决策的重要依据。
节目中提到了两种决策理论:证据决策理论和因果决策理论。
证据决策理论认为应该考虑所有可能影响结果的证据。
因果决策理论则只关注与结果有直接因果关系的决策因素。
Newcomb's Paradox 展示了在决策时考虑预测准确性的重要性。
节目中提到了对超过1000名哲学家、数学家和科学家的调查,探讨了他们的选择。
悖论引发了关于决策过程中理性与结果之间关系的深入思考。
Transcripts
Hello everyone, welcome to the Big Question Program.
I am the host of Robot Mr. Xia No. 1.
The big question to be discussed in this episode is
which one do you choose between 1,000 yuan and 10 million?
Then after listening to this topic selection, you will think that this is not a big problem.
Isn’t this question just a stupid question? As
long as my brain is functioning,
I will definitely choose 10 million.
But the question is not that simple.
Let’s introduce one to you today. A paradox that is hotly debated
among philosophers and mathematicians
is called Newcomb's Paradox.
It was first proposed by physicist William Newcomb
and later further analyzed in a paper by philosopher Robert Nozick
, thus becoming an academic circle. Popular topics in it.
By the way, Newcomb's Paradox is also a personality test.
Just like today we like to test whether you are an I person or an E person.
You only need to watch this short philosophy program
to test who you are. Is it a one-box person or a two-box person
? When you confront another type of person in the comment area,
you will find that
human brains are not connected
. Let's talk about it.
What is this Newcomb's Paradox?
That's what we imagine. Due to the great development of science and technology,
there is now a supercomputer tailor-made for you.
This supercomputer has super powerful computing power
and has collected all your user data from a fertilized egg to the present,
including your genes. , your brain neural network,
your personality, your preferences, your various orientations and tendencies.
Do you like to eat sweet tofu or salty tofu? Anyway,
this supercomputer can accurately predict
your various behavioral trends. It can
make predictions very accurately,
such as whether you will eat breakfast tomorrow and what kind of breakfast you will eat.
Of course, due to the limited development
of this technology, we are still many, many years away from the advent of this kind of supercomputer.
But in theory, as long as the computing power is enough, It
is because it can accurately predict your behavior.
After all, your body and brain in the macroscopic world are made up of molecules and atoms, and
their movements follow rules.
In fact, scientists have already done experiments to confirm it, or they have
used instruments. Measuring your brain waves,
when you make a decision on whether to press a button,
the instrument has already measured what decision you are going to make in advance.
So as long as the computing power is infinite and there is enough data, your behavior
can be accurately predicted in advance.
Now there are With this supercomputer, let's go back to the problem of choosing money.
Now there are two boxes containing money in front of you,
a transparent box and an opaque black box.
You have two options. Option 1 is to only take the black box.
Option 2 is to take away both boxes. You
can see how much money is in the transparent box.
You can see 1,000 yuan in the transparent box
, but you can't see how much money is in the other opaque black box. There
may be 10 million in it, or there may not be 1 penny in
it. It depends on which supercomputer predicts whether you are
a single-boxer or a double-boxer.
The single-boxer one-boxer chooses to take only black. A
two-boxer is a person who chooses to take both boxes.
If the supercomputer predicts that you are a one-boxer, that
is, you will choose to take only the black box
, then the supercomputer will put it in the black box in advance. 10 million
, then you will gain 10 million.
If the supercomputer predicts that you are a two-box person,
that is, you will take away both boxes
, then the supercomputer will put a penny in the black box in advance
, and you will only gain. 1,000 yuan in the transparent box.
So the question is
, should you choose to be a single-box person or a double-box person?
So for this problem, I guess you don’t have to think about it.
You must only use the black box to be a single-box person,
because in this way you can get 10 million.
If you take both boxes,
the super computer predicts that I will take two boxes.
Then there will be no money in the black box. I can only gain 1,000 yuan,
10 million yuan and 1,000 yuan.
Of course, I choose to be a one-box person and gain 10 million yuan.
But if the problem is so simple, it
is not worth doing a big problem program. Many
people, including many philosophers and mathematicians,
will still choose to use both boxes.
The reason they gave seems very reasonable.
They gave a very eloquent argument for this:
Premise 1 is that no matter whether the supercomputer enters the black box What is put
is either 10 million in the black box
or 0 yuan in it.
Then premise 2 is that if there are 10 million in the black box
, then if I only
take the black box, I will gain 10 million. If I take two boxes, I will gain 10,001,000
and Premise 3 If there is 0 yuan in the black box, then if I only take the black box, I will gain 0 yuan.
If I take two boxes, I will gain 1,000 yuan .
From this, it can be inferred that if there is 10 million in the black box,
I should take two boxes
and the inference. 2. If there is 0 yuan in the black box, I should take two boxes.
This ultimately leads to the conclusion that no matter what, I should take two boxes
to complete the argument
. This argument is still very eloquent.
In fact, in practical terms, why do we want to be a two-box person?
It is very simple. Ah, because a single box is 1,000 yuan less, no matter what,
then why not use the 1,000 yuan that is free in this transparent box?
But single-box people still feel that the choice of double-box people is unreasonable.
The problem is that since the prediction ability of supercomputers is super accurate
and they have already told you the rules
, if you choose to take the double-box, there will be no inside the black box. There are 10 million
, so as long as you choose to be a single-box person, you can earn 10 million.
Why would you be stupid and become a double-box person and only earn 1,000 yuan?
In fact, the two-box people also admit
that the supercomputer's prediction is very accurate.
It's not that the two-box people don't believe that the supercomputer can predict that they are a two-box person.
But even so, the two-box people will still insist on choosing the two-box person.
Why? The reason is that the double-box strategy is the most rational strategy
, which is the rational reasoning process just given.
Double-box people believe that as long as the decision-making process is rational, clean, and hygienic,
no matter what result it actually reaches,
we should also Unswervingly make decisions according to rational procedures.
In the eyes of the two-box people, the decisions made by those single-box people
may win more money
, but they are not rational enough
. Of course, the single-box people laugh at the two-box people
and say, "You do it." After making such a "rational" decision
, why can't you two-box people get the 10 million?
Those of us single-box people who seem "irrational"
to you have made much more money than you.
So since you two-box people are so "rational"
, why do you make so little money?
This argument is called Why aren't you rich argument
"You are poor, you have no argument."
The two-box people refuted this
, saying that if we admit that the super computer is really super developed,
its prediction of my behavior is Very accurate.
So why did I choose the double box?
That’s because the supercomputer had long predicted that I would have no chance of making a fortune.
There was not even a penny
in this black box.
We have to pay attention to
the settings of that supercomputer. It's definitely not a fantasy setting.
It doesn't mean that I originally chose a single box and put 10 million in the black box.
Then I changed my mind and chose a double box. Then the supercomputer used magic
to snap and quickly put 10 million in the black box. The money suddenly disappeared. No,
the money in this black box has been determined from the beginning. We can think of it this way.
These two boxes were already placed there
many years ago
, and the supercomputer will judge your behavior based on the results. The prediction
predicts whether you will choose a single box or a double box many years from now.
Decide whether to put money into this black box. There is no magic factor in it.
So let’s talk about the double box people. They think that
the supercomputer has predicted it a long time ago. I have never made a fortune. The chance
supercomputer has long predicted that I am a two-box person.
It has already happened that there is no money in the black box.
So compared to my choice of only taking the black box and getting 0 yuan
, it is definitely better to choose the double box and get 1,000 yuan.
In fact, regardless of whether the supercomputer predicted whether I would get rich or not,
from the perspective of the two-box people, this is not what the single-box people think.
The question of whether to choose 10 million or 1,000 yuan
is not to say that we, the two-box people,
gave up the 10 million that could have been in the black box in order to get more 1,000 yuan in the
transparent box . This is not because of the choice of the two-box people. As a result, the money in the black box is gone.
There is no causal relationship between the two.
Whether there is 10 million in the black box has
been decided before I make a choice
. It will not happen because I choose both boxes
. The 10 million yuan suddenly disappeared.
So since I had already ordered
the 1,000 yuan in the transparent box, it was given away for free,
so why didn’t I get 1,000 yuan more?
Fortunately, now that the scenario of Newcomb's Paradox thought experiment has been explained,
if it were you,
would you be a one-box person or a two-box person?
Don’t think this question is a child’s play.
It is a big issue that is debated among philosophers and mathematicians. In
2020, a scholar surveyed
more than 1,000 philosophers, mathematicians and scientists
on this question , and 31% of the respondents chose Instead of being a one-box person,
39% of the respondents chose to be a two-box person.
They all have different opinions and no one can convince anyone.
Why is this Newcomb question so hotly debated among scholars?
Because it involves two
philosophies . In the battle between mathematical decision-making theories,
the decision-making theory of the single-box man is the
Evidential Decision Theory
, while the decision-making theory of the double-box man is the causal decision theory.
These two decision-making theories
are the single-box man and the double-box man. Box people, two types
of people with different brains, use different theoretical models when making decisions.
Next, let’s introduce the differences between these two decision-making theories.
Why do single-box people and double-box people take different decisions?
It's because they adopt different decision-making theories when making decisions.
Of course, these two decision-making theories are very mathematical if
you want to study them in detail. In simple human terms, it is
the causal decision-making theory of the double-box person, which means that we
only need to consider the right decision
when making decisions. Achieving our expected return is the goal of making more money.
Variables that have a direct causal relationship
and other factors that do not have a causal relationship are ignored.
We should not think about these irrelevant variables in our minds.
These irrelevant variables are all interference variables and
they are all noise. Our decisions have no impact.
For example, as I said before,
although the two-box people also believe that the supercomputer's prediction of their own behavior
is very accurate
, no matter how accurate it is, it
has no causal relationship
with how I choose to make more money here and now.
Because whether there is money in the black box is already a given, I
don’t need to consider the supercomputer’s prediction of my behavior many years ago in my decision-making here and
now. Now the only question for me, a two-box person, is
whether to make more money. The problem of the 1,000 yuan in the transparent box
. The single-box person's evidence-based decision-making theory considers different things from the two-box person. The
single-box person not only has to consider factors that have a direct causal relationship
with achieving our goals,
but also some factors. If there is no direct causal relationship
but it can provide some evidence factors to achieve our goals,
then we must consider that if we perform certain choices under the existing evidence conditions,
it will increase the probability of making more money.
If you have learned If you look at conditional probability in probability and statistics,
you will understand what this means. The so-called consideration of existing evidence
means that the prediction of our behavior by super computers is super accurate.
Since we recognize this, we must treat it as evidence,
as an evidence, and as a condition
. I need to incorporate this supercomputer's prediction of my behavior
into my decision-making considerations.
This does not mean that the one-box man is more superstitious than the two-box man.
The one-box man also knows that his choice will not lead to blackmail. The money in the box
suddenly appears or disappears.
Whether there is money in this black box has been determined many years ago.
But the single-box people think that only the black box should be used.
Why? Since we recognize the prediction ability of supercomputers,
the single-box people only The choice of taking the black box
provides strong evidence. It reflects the super prediction ability of supercomputers
and thus greatly increases the probability that there are 10 million in the black box.
According to the evidence-based decision-making theory of single-box people, it is
only Although taking the black box does not "cause" that there are 10 million in the black box,
it means that there are 10 million in the black box,
but it "means" that there will be 10 million in the black box,
which means that there will be 10 million in the black box.
What's it like?
It's just like the weather forecaster predicts that it will rain tomorrow,
which "means" it will really rain tomorrow.
Although there is no causal relationship,
it is not that the weather forecaster's forecast "causes" it to rain tomorrow,
but the weather The forecaster's forecast gives you strong evidence
to make you believe that it will really rain tomorrow
, so you really should bring an umbrella when you go out tomorrow.
So let's talk about the final difference between single-box people and double-box people
in the simplest words. It means whether you
should take the supercomputer's prediction of your actions into consideration
when deciding between single box and double box.
Single box people think that of course it needs to be considered, while double box people think that it does not need to be considered.
Although it is not accurate, it is probably a bit In other words,
did the facts affect your decision-making or did your decision-making reflect the facts?
So when faced with Newcomb's problem,
are you a one-box person or a two-box person?
Please cast your vote
and express
your opinion
in the comment area below the video.
You are also welcome to forward this program to your friends
and test whether they are single-box people or double-box people?
Browse More Related Video
ISLAM vs POIRIER FINAL PREDICTIONS | WHO WINS STRICKLAND vs COSTA?!
5 best email marketing platforms (2024 update) | ActiveCampaign vs. ConvertKit vs. Mailerlite
How to make smart decisions more easily
X Talks: Annie Duke on why quitters win
Poirier and Volk?? Volkanovski Gets a Clean Sweep on his 302 Picks
Beyond the Box Episode 3: Visibility in supply chains
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)