[ExI] A Simulation Argument

[Kevin H]

Interesting argument Goddard.  But one thing strikes me: you're trying to
argue for a computer-simulated reality, but given your definition for a
"real external world" all you're really arguing for is an observer-dependent
reality.  While, I agree that a computer-simulated entails an
observer-dependent reality, I don't see how the reverse can be argued.  To
me, this looks like a classical argument for anti-realism, just given a
quantum theoretical spin.  At first, when studying the argument, it brought
to mind mind-dependent theories of reality, but it occurred to me that there
actually is a difference between being mind-dependent and being
observer-dependent, though it is logically possible that reality can be
both.

I think given the sparseness of real empirical evidence, the best we can do
is build a collection of possible hypotheses that explain it and try to
wittle down the possibilities one by one.  I don't think we'll end up with
one final hypothesis that we can adopt without a reasonable doubt, perhaps
the criteria should be more likely than not?

Thanks,

Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080105/b443c241/attachment.html>