A little backstory. I have always had some issues, during my early teen years I was obsessed with fantasies- certain specific fantasies. This came to the point that my family started investigating mentall illness as a way to understand some of the things I was doing/saying/thinking. Ive never actually been commited, or recieved proffesional psychiatric treatment, but that doesnt mean i shouldnt have.
I would just like to point out that the cause for these issues was the intense and unshakable desire to exsist in a world "above ours", that this ordinary, "merely real" world was a sad and pathetic place to live.
In my adult life i have resolved some of my issues, but that deep burning desire to live in a more spectacular reality would occasionally nag. However these words-
"If I'm going to be happy anywhere, Or achieve greatness anywhere, Or learn true secrets anywhere, Or save the world anywhere, Or feel strongly anywhere, Or help people anywhere, I may as well do it in reality."
Have seriously altered the way I think about the world over the past 24 hours of pondering. Its sort of like having these pressing, burning desires which were aimed at a situation of near infinite impossibility has suddenly been aimed at the real world.
Like things i do could actually matter at some point in my life, instead of just being drown out by the despair of normallity.
"But once I assign a probability of 1 to a proposition, I can never undo it. No matter what I see or learn, I have to reject everything that disagrees with the axiom. "
I think this is what causes the religious argument paradox. On a deep down level, most of us realize this is true.
Now perhaps I am misunderstanding the problem. Are we to assume that all this is foreknowledge?
Given the information present in this article I would just choose to take only B. But that is assuming that Omega is never wrong. Logic in my own mind dictates that regardless of why I chose B, or if I at some earlier point may have Two-Boxed, at this time I choose box B, and if Omega's prediction is never wrong- then if I choose B, B will contain a million dollars.
Now in an alternate itteration of this dilemna, regardless of the truth (whiether Omega is indeed never wrong or not), if I only know of 100 observed occurences, that might have substancial influence on my reasoning. Given a failure rate of (at most) 1 out of 101, I may very well be tempted by all the prior mentioned arguments for taking boxes A and B, while I might still have a tendancy to just take box B anyway. After all, $1,000 dollars isnt life-changing for me, but I could really make use of a million.
When all is said and done it comes down to a choice of $1000, or $1,000,000 dollars. If Omega is never wrong, then there is never a possibility of taking $1,001,000. In which case, taking A and B results in $1,000 without fail, and if by choosing only B, B would never be empty. The choice seems obvious.