10

I just saw this SMBC comic. The second picture looked really promising, but as far as I see it, this attorney screwed up. With his second wish it doesn't matter whether you say wish or splork, so effectively the genie was forbidding to splork for more splorks as well. Is there a way to ask the genie for infinite wishes in a very clear logical way, that leaves the genie no loophole? (and let's pretend the genie really let's you have only three wishes, because in the comic one cannot say how many wishes the genie actually (wanted to) allow for. It is just somewhat implied that it was three so let's stick with that idea.)

Edit: I acknowledge and appreciate the easy answer of Gugg but if someone could give an answer with the now additional made up - and admittedly kinda dull - restriction, please answer as well: One cannot just tell the genie that what he says just doesn't count any more at all. I don't know now if the question is very well defined now, but maybe someone can still make something of it.

Jack
  • 221
  • 1
  • 2
  • 8
  • 4
    If you are asking for us to speculate on the rule-based restrictions of a mythical creature in a work of fiction, then I think this is off-topic for Philosophy.SE. – Niel de Beaudrap Jul 03 '13 at 14:34
  • It is a question about logic. A Gedankenexperiment. Rather obviously. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 14:38
  • 3
    "asking for us to speculate on the rule-based restrictions of a mythical creature in a work of fiction": The name here is philosophy of religion ;) – Annotations Jul 03 '13 at 15:10
  • Some somewhat related stuff on genies and wishes: [_three wishes joke_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_wishes_joke) and [_genie in popular culture_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_in_popular_culture) –  Jul 03 '13 at 15:15
  • The question is to the philosophical insights that we would obtain from such a "thought experiment". Apparently, in the SMBC comic you link to, the rules of genies are captured by words rather than the semantics associated with those words. If you would like to ask a question about the association of meanings to words, it is not clear how arguing that "genies don't work that way" (in what way 'do' genies work, given that they seem not to exist?) will shed light on the subject. – Niel de Beaudrap Jul 03 '13 at 15:33
  • If you would like to carry out the thought experiment, perhaps you should define how the genies in your thought experiment should work; and also whether, given the injunction against wishes for more wishes, you consider any loophole to be tantamount to a logical inconsistency in your model of genies. – Niel de Beaudrap Jul 03 '13 at 15:37
  • He gives you three wishes and says you can't wish for more wishes. As given in the comic (except for the 3 question thing). But I said that in my question. And if my implication wasn't obvious: He is supposed to understand logic and fulfill the wishes that are asked for. And the question is whether there is a way to still (indirectly) ask for infinite wishes. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 15:40
  • 2
    It would be more interesting to wish "I dont want this wish to come true". – jinawee Jul 03 '13 at 15:47
  • I don't think that that would be interesting, but only because the paradoxes that can arise are pretty known. As "I wish that you make a stone as heavy that you can't lift it up. Now I wish you lift it up" and all kinds of that stuff. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 15:49
  • You should just ask the Genie to get to work, number of wishes irrelevant. http://lesswrong.com/lw/ld/the_hidden_complexity_of_wishes/ – shieldfoss Jul 04 '13 at 19:17
  • I too had this Dream to Ask for more wishes :) – Okky Jul 09 '13 at 05:25
  • Something that should be said as a matter of philosophical interest: The comic's strategy is a Use/Mention confusion - it assumes that the Genie's "injunction" is primarily a linguistically compositional statement, whereas in fact the Genie was simply using the sentence to state the rule (which of course exists independently of its being stated). So what the comic suggests is not a logical way around the Genie's imposition - in fact it is premised on a fallacy that you would do well to avoid in the Philosophy of Language. – Paul Ross Mar 01 '14 at 16:43

5 Answers5

6

This solution uses the term void, which is (also) used in law, thus keeping it sort of in line with the question.

Genie: Fine, fine! So let me guess – your first wish is to void all the wishing rules., right? I’ve been waiting 2,000 years for someone to figure that out.

Aladdin: Yup, and then infinite wishes.

Genie: Granted and… granted…

Aladdin: And I wish for you to prevent me from ever making a bad wish.

Source: CollegeHumor

I think that wish number 3 is actually quite smart, as many wishes are not quite thought through well, and usually backfire when granted (particularly in jokes). The meaning of "bad" is of course discussed elsewhere on Philosophy SE. Also note that these wishes might result in the (perceived) loss of (some) free will (if there was any, perceived or not). Which might (or might not) be "bad" in itself.

Community
  • 1
  • Ah, no I see, this is basically saying, I wish that your restriction doesn't count. Well, yeah, that actually would be the easy way out. Boringly easy, unfortunately ;) – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 15:46
  • @Jack I thought that wish number 3 was actually quite smart, as many wishes are not quite thought through well, and usually backfire when granted (particularly in jokes). –  Jul 03 '13 at 15:50
  • I would formulate it differently though. "prevent me from ever making any wish that makes me unhappy" (Because bad wish is so terribly ill defined and you are letting the genie decide what is bad...) But really this can be done more easy by just wishing to be maximally happy in the first place, which is what I would actually really do. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 15:57
  • Well just saying that "bad" is discussed by philosophers doesn't make it more secure ;) Also again, as well one could have asked for "make me wish the best wishes" in the first place (one didn't even have to think about how to trick the genie into having infinite questions since, if that is something "good", the genie would do that for you.) – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 16:04
  • @Jack Note that with your comment on "happy" you are touching on philosophical debate (also in economic theory, political theory, decision theory, and probably more fields). Your other comment ("make me wish the best wishes") seems quite a smart short-cut, _but you asked about infinite wishes_. However, also, note that both strategies might result in the loss of (some) free will. Which might be bad. :) –  Jul 03 '13 at 16:12
  • "but you asked about infinite wishes" Of course this is unrelated, I was just responding to your claim that Aladdins third wish was particularly clever. My initial question had nothing to do with what would be the wish that you should go for (in order to make you the most happy or whatever). The question was just inspired by the mistake in the comic and thereby questioning whether there is a way to accomplish the same (without making a mistake). – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 17:10
  • "loss of (some) free will. Which might be bad". I don't believe in free will, so... Anyhow, even if it did exist, it wouldn't bother me after I am in the state of maximal happiness, right? Also, the wish might not even be as selfish as it sounds, since my state of maximal happiness would probably be incompatible with wars and suffering and so on. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 17:15
  • That first argument in that last comment is invalid. By stating that specific wish (and being granted it) you may have closed off paths to happier outcomes. –  Jul 03 '13 at 17:18
  • I see what you are saying but in that case: The genie (btw, we are of course implying that he is not just omnipotent, but also omniscient, so he is somewhat a slave God thehe) would in that case just manipulate stuff around me to make my life really convenient, but not actually get in my head or something if it wouldn't actually make me more happy. However he accomplishes making me as happy as possible is none of mine concerns, so I think the wish is really safe. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 17:23
  • Hmmm, I don't know... Would an unlimited supply of [cocaine](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kInoeTycY60) do the job? –  Jul 03 '13 at 17:40
  • And, with you not believing in free will, perhaps you also are a determinist of some sorts. In that case, asking to be happy as possible might just about change nothing. (And not only because you were going to ask it anyway.) –  Jul 03 '13 at 17:53
  • I am quite sure that it wouldn't. I have to say though, that first I was thinking of throwing in time in some way (happiness forever or for as long until I decide to die or something else, that I couldn't decide right away) but then I didn't want to make things complicated. Cocaine would probably kill you pretty soon, but that could be wished away somehow, so that is not what I want to criticize. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 17:53
  • My point is, that we don't know what would make us most happy. If it were some drug, fine, I don't think it is likely, but the reasons why it sounds unsatisfactory wouldn't matter if it were the most happiness bringing thing possible. We just think of drugs not being the best answer because we have some good evidence based reasons to think so. Again, I don't care what is the best way, because I can't know it better than the omniscient genie. And so why would I want to let myself decide what's best for me if by assumption the genie is more capable than me (and everybody else) in doing so? – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 17:55
  • But, I think, according to some philosophical arguments, we already live in the best possible world. :) –  Jul 03 '13 at 17:57
  • Perhaps: It's being in the driving seat that provides _extra_ pleasure. –  Jul 03 '13 at 17:58
  • Well I don't believe in genies as well, so my not believing in free will is not the point were it breaks down in the first place ;) – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 17:59
  • So, I guess that after the genie has granted your wish, he would thereafter have to convince you that you are still in the driving seat, by having _some_ of your wishes turn out (slightly) wrong, because otherwise you wouldn't feel like being in the driving seat anymore, which might hurt your feelings. Hmmm, interesting. –  Jul 03 '13 at 18:02
  • I see that you have a physics account and have asked a question about determinism :D Yeah, so I believe in the weak principle of causality as well and together with quantum mechanics this makes creatures like Laplace's demon impossible and thereby I tend to not call myself a determinist (but maybe a determinist of some sort. I just don't believe in a free will that has some dualistic notion, but I think it is a practical term. I could talk a lot about this stuff, I am convinced I have a pretty consistent few) – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 18:08
  • "by having some of your wishes turn out (slightly) wrong, " Why so? As I wanted to clarify, I am not having any preconditions about how he makes me happy. I also don't care if I am being fooled into my happiness in some way or the other. And neither should anyone else. What can a human being can possible and justifiably want to be rather in than the state of maximal happiness? Actually it is (my?) definition. If there were something I'd rather experience, call that happiness. – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 18:14
  • few? the last word of my second last comment should have been view, obviously, but I cannot edit it anymore ... – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 18:17
  • Well, because the genie wouldn't actually grant all your (future) wishes then (fully), in order for you to maintain the illusion of being in the driving seat (the statistical falsification of which might hurt your happiness relative to not wishing for optimal happiness in the first place). But not granting any wish would be contradictory to the underlying assumption of the problem. –  Jul 03 '13 at 18:18
  • Then you are just saying that I can't be totally happy, I have to swallow some things I don't want (I guess that is what you mean by wishes? maybe/probably I don't need to wish for anything else after making the ultimate happiness wish) Anyhow, you are stating some possible scenarios that may not sound so awesome. And I am still dwelling on my claim, that I don't know and if the maximal happiness just isn't that totally awesome in our/your/whoevers view now, it still doesn't matter most happy is still always better than less happy, almost trivially, since I have defined everything accordingly – Jack Jul 03 '13 at 18:24
  • Please take extended discussions to chat. Comments should be focused around clarifying the question or answer. I will probably be coming through and cleaning this up soon. – Joseph Weissman Jul 04 '13 at 14:44
4

Your initial premise is that a genie can grant you exactly three wishes, and that he cannot grant you the wish of more wishes. I would presume that the heart of what is meant by the latter restriction is that you cannot wish anything that would alter the structure of the wishing system itself. This, however, is easily bypassed if you wish for more genies of the type in our premise.

Tradition brings us two more rules regarding wishes, however. Here are all three:

  1. You cannot wish for more wishes.
  2. You cannot wish to kill or bring back from the dead.
  3. You cannot wish for anyone to fall in love with you.

Again, these rules seem to have more generic rules at the heart of them:

  1. You cannot wish anything that would alter the structure of the wishing system itself.
  2. You cannot wish to bring anything into existence which is not already in existence nor remove anything from existence.
  3. You cannot wish to alter someone's emotions/desires/feelings.

To elaborate on number 2, obviously the genie could rearrange matter to produce many things, but reproducing a person would make an indistinguishable replica but not the original--which for some reason the genie refuses to do on principle. Also, technically killing is a transition of states, but the genie likely refuses to do this on principle as well.

Assuming that there are already more genies of the type in our premise out there, wishing for more genies should still work, but eventually you will run out of genies (unless there are already an infinite number of genies out there).

called2voyage
  • 331
  • 4
  • 13
2

If you want to leave no loopholes, I would recommend wishing for a logical system to be true. E.g. you could wish that everything you show in naive logic would come true, and then use Curry's Paradox to prove whatever you wanted.

Xodarap
  • 2,770
  • 14
  • 24
2

A man is granted three wishes by a genie. His first wish is for infinite wishes. The Genie replies: "Sorry, but that is a wish about wishing, a meta wish. You'd need a meta-genie for that."

mart
  • 547
  • 3
  • 14
  • Cute, from where did you get that? – Jack Jul 09 '13 at 21:51
  • 2
    @Jack My guess: Hofstadter's _Gödel, Escher, Bach_, "Djinn and Tonic". See [this transcript](http://amberbaldet.com/uploads/little-harmonic-labrynth.html). –  Jul 11 '13 at 09:28
1

What about "I wish to have the power to fulfill all my wishes." All subsequent wishes are now fulfilled by you instead of the genie.

firtydank
  • 543
  • 2
  • 13