Re: Are we simulated by some massive computer?

From: George Levy <glevy.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 16:57:29 -0700

Russell

OK. You are suffering from 3rd person thinking which leads you to these
conclusions:
    1) As a scientist experimenting with this simulated creature, you
have absolutely no evidence that this creature is conscious.
     2) You believe that the creature (conscious or unconscious) is
stuck in your simulation.
    3) You believe that your simulator is the world of the creature.

First person thinking leads to other conclusions:
    1) You perceives this creature as a different instantation of your
own "I." Therefore you believe that the creature has some form of
consciousness, maybe not identical to your own, but nevertheless,
consciousness.
    2) The world this creature exists in is to some extent
indeterminate. It may be your own simulator that you purchased with some
government grant, or it could be another almost identical simulator that
*&%$-AT_SYMBOL-! run on Alpha Centauri 1,000,000 years ago. Or it could be yet
another one. Only the creature itself can perform experiments to refine
its perception of its world. Should you pull the plug on your simulator,
the creature would continue to exist somewhere or somewhen else in the
plenitude.
    3) The indeterminacy and the experiment that the creature can
conduct are limited by its own perception of itself, of its mind, of its
body and of its world. Its own mind will shape its own world.

George


Russell Standish wrote:

>Sorry, but I fail to see it as self evident. Imagine being a creature
>immersed in a virtual reality setup its entire life, a virtual reality
>that does not include a representation (ie a body) of the creature itself.
>
>Would that creature deduce that it is in a virtual reality, and that
>it has a body in another (unobservable to it) reality?
>
>Or would it even be conscious?
>
> Cheers
>
>On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 04:10:15PM -0700, George Levy wrote:
>
>
>>Russell wrote
>>
>>
>>
>>>However, the mind-body problem doesn't completely disappear - rather
>>>it is transformed into "Why the Anthropic Principle?".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Once you have accepted that "I" exist and that "I" am capable of logical
>>thinking and capable of following a logical chain, then the Anthropic
>>principle becomes trivial. What "I" am and what "I" observe becomes the
>>initial boundary condition for a logical chain leading to the proof of
>>the existence of the world: "I am therefore the world is." This is the
>>Anthropic Principle.
>>
>>George
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Tue May 11 2004 - 20:03:43 PDT