349
edits
Changes
no edit summary
===The core argument===
The core of the simulation argument does not try do demonstrate that reality is, in fact, a simulation. It merely shows that one of three propositions should be accepted as true (1; 3)<ref name=”1”></ref> <ref name=”3”></ref>. The general idea can be understood without mathematics, although a formal version of the argument uses probability theory <ref name=”7”> Bostrom, N. (2006). Do we live in a computer simulation? New Scientist, 192(72579): 38-39</ref>. Although each of the propositions may seem implausible, if the simulation argument is correct, at least one is true (6)<ref name=”6”></ref>. According to Bostrom (2003, 2006), the three proposition presented are:
1. Almost all civilizations at our level of development become extinct before becoming technologically mature.
2. The fraction of technologically mature civilizations that are interested in creating ancestor simulations is almost zero.
3. You are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. <ref name=”1”></ref> <ref name=”6”></ref> <ref name=”7”></ref> If the first proposition is false then a major portion of all species at our level of development will achieve the posthuman stage (technological maturity). On the contrary, if true, it does not mean that humanity will face extinction soon but that it is unlikely to reach a posthuman stage. It is also possible that a civilization could remain arrested for a long time at the current level of technological development before going extinct <ref name=”1”></ref> <ref name=”6”></ref>. If the second proposition is also false then it follows that a portion of these species that are technologically mature will use some of their computer resources to run ancestor simulations, recreating minds like ours and doing so in vast numbers. In order for it to be true, there needs to be a convergence among the development of advanced civilizations, in which almost none of them are interested in running computer simulation, or have wealthy individuals interested in doing that. Another possibility is that they have enforced laws that prevent individuals from acting on their desires to run simulations. Advanced posthuman civilizations could also perceive the ethical problem of running ancestor-simulations, due to the suffering that is inflicted on the inhabitants of the simulation. This could lead to the prohibition of such simulations being created. Finally, if the third proposition is true, then reality is almost certainly a computer simulation created by an advanced civilization <ref name=”1”></ref> <ref name=”6”></ref> <ref name=”7”> Bostrom, N. (2006). Do we live in a computer simulation? New Scientist, 192(2579): 38-39</ref> <ref name=”8”> Bostrom, N. (2005). Why make a matrix? And why you might be in one. Retrieved from http://simulation-argument.com/matrix2.html</ref>.
If the proposition that we are living in a computer simulation is true, then the universe that we are observing is a small piece of the totality of physical existence, and the physics of the universe in which the computer is running may not resemble the physics of our observable universe. Therefore, our world would not be located at the fundamental level of reality. The veracity of that proposition could also mean that it could be possible for simulated civilization to achieve the posthuman stage and run their own ancestor-simulations, on computers built in the simulated universe. These would be like “virtual machines”, which is a common concept in computer science. Also, virtual machines can be stacked, being possible to achieve several levels of simulations inside simulations. If our civilization develops ancestor-simulations, this would support the third proposition, leading to the conclusion that we would most likely be living in a simulations <ref name=”1”></ref>.
==References==
