A truly deep question
If a tree falls in a dense rainforest, and you know for certain that nobody was there to hear it, does it make a sound?
[thinks for a full minute]
Oh my God. This is the craziest question I have ever heard. OMFG.
Is there any significance… no, scratch that. Is there any meaning to sound beyond the perception of it? Sound is something a living being hears. There is nobody there. Is there any significance to a mundane crash if nobody is around to observe it? Not really.
[pause]
But you just know the tree is going to make a sound. If you even mentally put yourself in that forest, you can hear it. CRASH.
Oh my God, how circular. How weird. How bizarre. The world is a place of such contradictions—
[different voice, flat]
Just drop the act, bro. Calm down.
[normal voice]
Okay. Say there are two friends. Ram believes the tree made a sound. Sham believes it did not. How do they settle this?
Round one. They walk into the forest and look. Is the tree on the ground?
Okay. No fight yet.
Round two. Lucky for them, someone left a recorder next to the tree. They play it back. Is there a crash on the tape?
Here, I, the author, side with Ram. Obviously. The tape did not invent the crash.
Round three. Sham is not done.
[They do this until sunset. Then the next sunset.]
Meanwhile, in a smarter universe
Same forest. Same tree. Same Ram and Sham. But in this universe, they have read a few blog posts.
They walk to the bookie at the edge of the forest. Yes, there is a bookie at the edge of the forest. It is a smart universe.
[long silence]
[longer silence]
[The author, who sided with Ram, quietly realizes he also agrees with Sham. Embarrassing.]
What the smart universe did differently
They used two tests, and both are easy to remember.
The bet. A real disagreement about the world can always become a bet, because you can name something that would come out one way if you are right and the other way if I am right. If you cannot write a bet that one of you could lose, you do not disagree about the world.
Banning the word. When an argument goes in circles around one word, stop using the word. Each person says what he means in other words. If the two descriptions fit together, the argument was only about the word. If they still conflict, now you can see the real disagreement in plain terms, and you can go and check it.
So before you argue with someone, ask one question: “Is there anything you expect to see that I don't?” If the answer is no, choose who gets which word, and go eat. If the answer is yes, good. Now you know what to go and look at.
Both ideas come from Eliezer Yudkowsky's essays “Making Beliefs Pay Rent (in Anticipated Experiences)” and “Taboo Your Words.” His versions have fewer people shouting “SQUIGGLES,” and no vada pav.
