The Crux of The Problem
The crux of the paradox is in the existence of two contradictory arguments, both being seemingly correct.
- A powerful intuitive belief, that past events cannot be affected. My future action cannot determine the fate of an event that happened before the action.
- Newcomb proposes a way of doing precisely this - affecting a past event. The prediction of the Predictor establishes equivalence between my choice (of renouncing the open box) and the content of the closed box, which was determined in the past. Since I can affect the future event, I can also affect the past event, which is equivalent to it.
The use of first person in the formulation of the second argument is essential: only when playing the role of the chooser I feel that I determine the fate of the past event. Looking from aside at another person participating in the experiment does not arouse a feeling of contradiction. Their choice and its prediction are part of a causal chain, that in principle is not problematic.
A solution of the paradox must point out an error in one of the two arguments. Either the intuition is wrong, or there is something wrong with the way proposed for affecting the past.
Read more about this topic: Newcomb's Paradox
Famous quotes containing the words crux and/or problem:
“This is the crux of the moral pessimists: if they really wanted to promote their neighbor’s redemption, then they would have to resolve themselves to spoiling existence for him, and thus to being his misfortune; out of pity, they would have to—become evil!”
—Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900)
“To make a good salad is to be a brilliant diplomatist—the problem is entirely the same in both cases. To know exactly how much oil one must put with one’s vinegar.”
—Oscar Wilde (1854–1900)