349
edits
Changes
no edit summary
There is also the question of how can we trust the observations made about reality if it is a simulation. The simulation argument relies on the assumption of the technological capabilities of a posthuman civilization, and the evidence for that assumption is empirical, based on the current best theories about the physical limits of computation. Ultimately, these observations of the world around us could be misleading, providing data about the simulated reality and not about the underlying reality in which the simulation is running. However, according to Bostrom, “the claim that we cannot have any information about the underlying reality if we are in a simulation is false.” He provides two conditional claims that can be know if reality is a simulation. These are adapted from the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page available in the website [http://www.simulation-argument.com www.simulation-argument.com] <ref name=”9”> Bostrom, N. (2008). The simulation argument FAQ. Retrieved from http://www.simulation-argument.com/faq.html</ref>:
'''1.''' If we are in a simulation, then the underlying reality is such as to permit simulations, it contains at least one such simulation, and (3) (the third proposition of the argument) is true.
'''2.''' If we are not in a simulation, then the empirical evidence noted in the simulation argument is veridical taken at face value, suggesting that a technologically mature civilization would have the ability to create vast number of simulations; and consequently, by the simulation argument, there is a very high probability at least one of the disjuncts in (1)-(3) is true <ref name=”9”></ref>.
==References==
