83,579
edits
Simulation hypothesis: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
To help Professor Degrasse-Tyson, here are some strong arguments against it: | To help Professor Degrasse-Tyson, here are some strong arguments against it: | ||
===We are the dead=== | ===We are the dead=== | ||
To take the simulation hypothesis to its logical conclusion — a ''[[reductio | To take the simulation hypothesis to its logical conclusion — a ''[[reductio ad absurdam]]'' — you don't need to travel very far, and you conclude ''intelligent life capable of creating a Matrix is logically impossible'', and we are, therefore, dead. Then again, if you can do it, then you are a simulation, and you aren’t actually alive either. If you can’t do it, then — clearly — you can’t be a simulation, but you must also be incapable of developing a difference engine that could create a Matrix, so you wouldn’t be having this conversation in the first place. We know we aren’t dead, so we must therefore be in a Matrix. | ||
===Deep Thought successor redux=== | ===Deep Thought successor redux=== | ||
But, problem: unless intelligent life becomes capable of simulating itself — that is, creating a Matrix — ''there can be no Matrix''. The definition of a Matrix is that it is a simulation of intelligent life. If there is no intelligent life to simulate, then, whatever a Matrix is, it can’t be a simulation. Could it be — ''the real thing''? | But, problem: unless intelligent life becomes capable of simulating itself — that is, creating a Matrix — ''there can be no Matrix''. The definition of a Matrix is that it is a simulation of intelligent life. If there is no intelligent life to simulate, then, whatever a Matrix is, it can’t be a simulation. Could it be — ''the real thing''? | ||