Read BIV - brains in a vat.Is the simulation as real as reality even as an in-between with reality, or must it be fake? — TiredThinker
If our experience is "not reality", then by definition it isn't "100% identical" to reality. Since the simulation is a simulation, then by definition it is "fake".What if our experience in life were a simulation and not reality directly, but reality is 100% identical to the simulation. When we interact with the simulation it has the same effects on reality, and when reality gives feedback it is through the simulation. Is the simulation as real as reality even as an in-between with reality, or must it be fake? — TiredThinker
What if our experience in life were a simulation and not reality directly, but reality is 100% identical to the simulation. When we interact with the simulation it has the same effects on reality, and when reality gives feedback it is through the simulation. Is the simulation as real as reality even as an in-between with reality, or must it be fake? — TiredThinker
Do we say movies are fake or video games? You can say these things don't happen outside the context they are given in, but that doesn't mean movies, videos games, etc. are fake. — Manuel
I don't see why a simulation should be considered fake as opposed to reality, because what would the difference be? — Manuel
What if our experience in life were a simulation and not reality directly, but reality is 100% identical to the simulation. When we interact with the simulation it has the same effects on reality, and when reality gives feedback it is through the simulation. Is the simulation as real as reality even as an in-between with reality, or must it be fake? — TiredThinker
If our experience is "not reality", then by definition it isn't "100% identical" to reality. Since the simulation is a simulation, then by definition it is "fake". — Cabbage Farmer
If there is no way for us to know that we are in a simulation as opposed to what we call reality, then they are the same thing — T Clark
If there is no way to tell in principle how these things are to be distinguished, then it is irrelevant for everyday life. — Manuel
It seems to me that if reality is a simulation, we have no alternative but accept that this 'external world' is real and carry on accordingly — Tom Storm
I think we do - endlessly repeated phrases - 'it's only a movie' or 'it's just a video game' spring to mind, which I believe stands for 'it's phoney'. The person who can't tell the difference between the fake worlds there ends up as Mark Chapman. — Tom Storm
It seems to me that if reality is a simulation, we have no alternative but accept that this 'external world' is real and carry on accordingly (all mysticism and religious posturing aside). — Tom Storm
Thanks. I agree, it seems like one of those cases in which simple analysis of the definition of terms unravels a psuedoproblem. Though in some such cases there may be ways of reformulating the initial problem to avoid this plight.A good reply. The simulation ceases to be a simulation, dropping out of consideration.
Notice that this is a piece of conceptual analysis? Clarifying the question and drawing out the consequence. — Banno
All too extraordinary.Consensus! How extraordinary. — Banno
Consensus! How extraordinary. — Banno
What if our experience in life were a simulation and not reality directly, but reality is 100% identical to the simulation. When we interact with the simulation it has the same effects on reality, and when reality gives feedback it is through the simulation. Is the simulation as real as reality even as an in-between with reality, or must it be fake? — TiredThinker
What if our experience in life were a simulation and not reality directly, but reality is 100% identical to the simulation. When we interact with the simulation it has the same effects on reality — TiredThinker
Apparent reality is a simulation, it is a simulation of your biological interpretation — boagie
Unless, like the turtles, it's simulations all the way down... — Banno
Unless, like the turtles, it's simulations all the way down...
— Banno
This would mean, objective reality is vacuous, non-existent. And it's not. There has to be a first simulation. The infinite line can be mapped on the circle. If it's simulation all around, then where is the world that is simulated? — DecheleSchilder
Meh. Like the turtles, there is no first in an infinite sequence, yet every item has a previous one on which to stand. So I disagree. Your's is the same argument as the theists who insist on a first cause - it's trivially wrong. — Banno
Your view is trivially wrong, as you can't point to a material world that is not simulated. Thus, the simulations are vacuous. — DecheleSchilder
That doesn't seem to follow. If it's all simulations, then there is no need for a material world; every simulation is explained by it's parent simulation. — Banno
As I said, a circle can be projected on the infinite line. That means that both infinities, at the end of the circle become the same. — DecheleSchilder
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.