💀
@thor @icedquinn
Yup. Pretty much why science ignores these philosophical questions in the first place. Whether we live in reality or a simulation, we observe that our world behaves by some rules, and they can be discovered. So we make the assumption that the rules are going to be consistent and start from there.
@alyx @thor @icedquinn The idea of being in a simulation is a religious one at its core; a belief reinforced by Bostrom 2003 paper, but also by pop-scientists/engineers. The more I look at it, the more it just seems unlikely .. at least from a "we're in a machine" perspective.
Much more likely is Arthur C Clark's Rama perspective, where the universe is one of millions being observed by creatures that created them (more of a "universe in a fish tank") ... but both seem ultimately unlikely to be proven before our extinction.
Much more likely is Arthur C Clark's Rama perspective, where the universe is one of millions being observed by creatures that created them (more of a "universe in a fish tank") ... but both seem ultimately unlikely to be proven before our extinction.
Follow
@djsumdog @thor @icedquinn
I personally take Matt Dilahunty's view on it. I don't care if this is a simulation or not. Whether it's a simulation or the real thing, I still want to find out the rules of how it all works, and so far there's been a single reliable way to do so.
