Posted: Jun 12, 2011 12:01 am
Although it is called a 'many worlds' hypothesis, it sounds like the hypothesis being discussed is in fact an 'every world hypothesis', in the sense that it seems to say that every possible world (possibly constrained by some set of initial conditions) exists.
I find every-world hypotheses, whether in the quantum-mechanics based form or any other, somewhat morally disheartening. If whenever faced with a moral decision I believe that, regardless of what choice I make, there will always be just as many worlds in which I make the immoral decision, it seems to make it pointless to weigh up ethical choices. In short, there is nothing I can do to make the totality of all worlds any better.
Fortunately, the hypothesis seems destined to remain a speculative hypothesis for the foreseeable future, so we can rationally choose to believe it or not on other grounds, such as aesthetics.
I find every-world hypotheses, whether in the quantum-mechanics based form or any other, somewhat morally disheartening. If whenever faced with a moral decision I believe that, regardless of what choice I make, there will always be just as many worlds in which I make the immoral decision, it seems to make it pointless to weigh up ethical choices. In short, there is nothing I can do to make the totality of all worlds any better.
Fortunately, the hypothesis seems destined to remain a speculative hypothesis for the foreseeable future, so we can rationally choose to believe it or not on other grounds, such as aesthetics.