Re: Evidence for the simulation argument

From: Stathis Papaioannou <>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:45:08 +1100

On 2/27/07, John M <> wrote:

> Bruno - thanks.
> Stathis did not address my "why simulation at all" main question, you did
> by an "IF" followed by "then" and another 'if' (already assumed) and it goes
> on and on.
> At the end we are in a virtual reality what could bring Hollywood a
> $billion and the teens would kill all the aliens in the video-games.
> It is not far from the Gedankenexperiment to shortcut something we do not
> understand by fantasy and keep it repeating so many times that people get
> used to it. That happened with the EPR, the Big Bang, (oops: indeed the
> expanding universe), etc. leading to 'complementarities' in which I really
> do not know: is our mental faculty not wide enough to comprehend it, or we
> just misunderstand some readings on our instruments. When people "get used"
> to the 'if'-s: comes the statement of a physicist on another list: "I can
> live with paradoxes".
> I feel sometimes somebody somehow somewhere should recall a 'reasonable'
> (original?) question.

I've no idea why we might be being simulated if we are being simulated. It
is actually very arrogant to assume that we are somehow the centre of the
simulation at all, like bacteria in my gut assuming that the universe, the
solar sysstem, humans were made for their benefit.

Stathis Papaioannou

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Mon Feb 26 2007 - 17:45:25 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:13 PST