[ExI] A Simulation Argument

[Samantha Atkins]

On Jan 12, 2008, at 2:25 AM, BillK wrote:

> On Jan 12, 2008 12:59 AM, Ian Goddard wrote:
>> By physical necessity, everything you've ever
>> perceived is a simulation of your external world
>> produced by and in your brain from sensory data
>> received from your external world. Your brain is a
>> biological computer. Therefore, everything you've
>> perceived is a computer-generated simulation. And so
>> the intricate dynamic complexity of the perceived
>> universe is not evidence against the ability of a
>> computer to create such an environment. QED ~Ian
>>
>
>
> Of course. But the basic flaw is; if we are existing in a computer
> simulation, who created the simulation?

That there had to be some non-simulation at the bottom of it doesn't  
say a lot about whether we are in a simulation or not.    Most of us  
here remember a well-developed argument some time back that if  
detailed sims are possible and likely in our universe and especially  
in "our" own future then the odds are quite strong that we are in a  
sim.   I didn't quite buy the details of that argument though.

>
> And the same logic applies to him/it. i.e. He/it may also be living in
> a computer simulation.
>
> It's simulations all the way down.
>

Don't be silly.  At the bottom is the Cosmic Turtle who ingested LSD  
and hallucinated it All.

- samantha