[extropy-chat] Simulation Argument critique (was fermi's paradox: m/d approach)

[Samantha Atkins]

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 13:00:14 -0500
"Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:

> Dirk Bruere wrote,
> > I think the most likely explanation is the Simulation 
> > Argument.
> 
> I find the Simulation Argument violates Occam's Razor.  It adds complexity
> that is not needed.  It does not help explain any observable phenomenon.  It
> also seems to reject all science.  If everything we observe is a simulation,
> then the simulation does not have to be constrained to known physical laws.
> Everything we think we know is wrong.  Anything is possible, whether science
> thinks it is or not.  The acceptance of the Simulation Argument seems to
> require a rejection of science.

It would be a pretty poor simulation if it did not follow well defined and consistent internal laws.  From the point of view of beings within the simulation those laws are the "known physical laws".   Within the simulation they are not in the least wrong.  Nothing is possible except what the simulation (local reality) was designed to make possible unless something from outside interferes.   There is no necessary rejection of science.

- samantha