The other reason this is bullshit is that it discounts the human character, which Dr. Manhattan showed himself to be constantly and acutely aware of throughout Moore's "Watchmen".
I'll explain: the above conjecture by this version of Dr. Manhattan apparently believes that literally anything could be in the box, and hence assumes that probabilities caused by human decisions are as infinite (and hence, unpredictable) as those caused by chance. But this is inaccurate, as human decisions are informed by character and/or experience, and having an intimate knowledge of them means that the probabilities they cause can be somewhat predictable. As shown in the original "Watchmen", Dr. Manhattan - like Sherlock Holmes before him, and Abed of "Community" after - is able to acutely observe and understand human character from an outsider's perspective much more precisely than a relatively normal person, and use the knowledge he gains from that perspective to predict their probable behaviour.
Thus: knowing his father as he does (as shown in the flashbacks in "Watchmen"), the above recollection by Dr. Manhattan should NOT state that the box could contain anything, because his intimate knowledge of his father, even before he became Dr. Manhattan, would be able to inform him of what sort of gift to expect: say, a watch, a physics textbook, a selection of papers by Einstein, etc. Probability might be infinite, but it can also be predictable when the observer knows what is probable and improbable.
Dr. Manhattan can't understand people at all, he was growing increasingly detached from humanity. What he could do is view all time simultaneously, past, present and future. He only knew what people would do because he could see them doing it in the future.
exactly, as time went on Dr Manhattan was comepletely DIVORCED from his humanity. it Laurie to get him back intouch with his humanity, even for a little while.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
no subject
I'll explain: the above conjecture by this version of Dr. Manhattan apparently believes that literally anything could be in the box, and hence assumes that probabilities caused by human decisions are as infinite (and hence, unpredictable) as those caused by chance. But this is inaccurate, as human decisions are informed by character and/or experience, and having an intimate knowledge of them means that the probabilities they cause can be somewhat predictable. As shown in the original "Watchmen", Dr. Manhattan - like Sherlock Holmes before him, and Abed of "Community" after - is able to acutely observe and understand human character from an outsider's perspective much more precisely than a relatively normal person, and use the knowledge he gains from that perspective to predict their probable behaviour.
Thus: knowing his father as he does (as shown in the flashbacks in "Watchmen"), the above recollection by Dr. Manhattan should NOT state that the box could contain anything, because his intimate knowledge of his father, even before he became Dr. Manhattan, would be able to inform him of what sort of gift to expect: say, a watch, a physics textbook, a selection of papers by Einstein, etc. Probability might be infinite, but it can also be predictable when the observer knows what is probable and improbable.
QUOT
ERAT
MOTHERF*CKING
DEMONSTRATDUM.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject