From: Evan Reese (email@example.com)
Date: Sun May 19 2002 - 17:33:24 MDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "ben goertzel" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: RE: singularity arrival estimate...
> I suppose we all react differently to these various existential
> For me, realizing there's a high chance we are living in a "simulation"
> part of a larger process of recognizing the semi-reality of the world
> around me ("semireal" being a PhilDickian term) -- and not just
> it intellectually, but learning to live with it as a part of everyday,
> minute-by-minut existence. I did not react by deciding to feel "as if the
> world were probably real anyway", nor by becoming entirely nihilistic, but
> quite differently in fact.
I heard an argument from someone - Brian Hay? - that if you accept the
Copernican principle, then the chance we are living in a simulation is low.
It is more likely that we would be in a hierarchy of simulations. This
principle would be violated if we were at the bottom of such a hierarchy;
but it would seem that we have to be, since there aren't simulated worlds
below us. Being at the bottom of such a hierarchy would be a special
position. By this logic, we are not in a simulation.
Has this argument been dealt with before? If so, would someone point me to
it? What are the holes in it? I don't see anything obviously wrong with it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:38 MDT