The Energon Pub

It really doesn't matter if the world was a simulation

We're still human and the world, simulated or not, is our responsibility.

If it is a simulation, then I have a lot of questions to ask.

1) why so much suffering? I don't buy that whole matrix idea of people rejecting reality without suffering, since if you were raised in a world without it from birth how would you know what it was? And how can you miss an emotion that, not only do you knot know exists, but haing never experienced it or anything similar might not be able to comprehend?

2)So what about people with mental disorders? are they real problems of some real body they have somewhere hooked up to the simulation and replicated within it? Are they not wired in corectly? Is it bad programing? Or is it part of the simulation? And if so why?

3) why spend so much time on things like buterfly wings but leave most of the universe as a void? Did you run out of ideas? Or did you run out of time to create? Or is this what you always intended it to be and if so why create a universe bigger than you needed? Or are you jsut a lazy git who left it half done?

4) Seriously, is this the best you could do? Really?

Maybe the people in charge of the simulation wished to replicate a period in history that was generally considered to be difficult to live in so that those who are plugged into this simulation can be tested to see if they are worthy of joining "proper" civilisation or not?

NO, it cant be. Imagining your life is simulated is a way to escape responsibility and hope you dont have to get up and go flip burgers tomorrow. You do, so get to work and make me lunch Neo.... Take the red pill and supersize me, Dingus!

Moff-V8 wrote:NO, it cant be. Imagining your life is simulated is a way to escape responsibility and hope you dont have to get up and go flip burgers tomorrow. You do, so get to work and make me lunch Neo.... Take the red pill and supersize me, Dingus!

Well, technically it can be. That a lot of people who believe it use it as an excuse to escape responsibility is irrelevant to the possibility of it.

But it doesn't matter a lot anyway. It's a pretty bad excuse, too. As if there are plenty of good ones...

Kextor wrote:What are your opinions on this? Could the world just be a simulated reality that when we go to sleep we in a sense like a forum or game go offline? There have been many examples of simulated reality's ex: .Hack// , Star Ocean Til the End of Time, FF10, etc. And if the world might just be some simulated reality what if this world created a simulated reality inside of itself? How would the original reality react to a simulated reality being created in their simulated reality?

No... now go back to sleep...

If its im in..
By the way, what if u break thru it or twist it ur own mind..
No wonder my head allways hurts or I thing everything unbelieveble..
I think its not possible
and I think its possible..

who knows, really..

Kextor wrote:What are your opinions on this? Could the world just be a simulated reality that when we go to sleep we in a sense like a forum or game go offline? There have been many examples of simulated reality's ex: .Hack// , Star Ocean Til the End of Time, FF10, etc. And if the world might just be some simulated reality what if this world created a simulated reality inside of itself? How would the original reality react to a simulated reality being created in their simulated reality?

If you were talking to me, I'm afraid I did not really understand your last sentence

But you mean like the Matrix?
Oh yeah, I've had my doubts after seeing that movie.. heck.. you should just watch it and throw away your doubts.. it leads you to no good eventually..

Kextor is wondering how the the original reality, the one that created our simulated reality, would react if we went and created a simulated reality of our own. Think of it as a snow bubble inside another snow bubble.

Assuming that we are a simulated reality, of course.

A lot of you seem to be talking as if this could be a simulated reality for other humans in another reality, or at least a simulation for some kind of 'us'.

What if we're all simulations for some extraneous body or being, something far detached from us. As Tammuz said, even the subconcious, even the mind, could be part of that simulation. Everything we both know and can conceive of could be fiction that is part of that simulation. Therefore, this could very well be a simulation.

Also, asking why there is suffering in a simulation doesn't go any way to justifying the notion that life isn't a simulation. Many of us experience simulated suffering, violence, etc. in our recreational lives. There's no reason why a simulation sophisticated enough to create our world wouldn't have such a spectrum of emotion and circumstance.

This world could easily and entirely be simulated. As Kjell said, we can never know. Certainly, however, there's no way to prove this isn't fabricated, and there's nothing to suggest this isn't a simulation, either.

Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

homelessjunkeon wrote:Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

"As for me, all I know is that I know nothing."

I have ideas like "Hey, what if I woke up from a life-long coma, and everything I came to know was just one of those wacky come-dreams? Like the English Language."

Then there's another: "What if I've been playing a virtual reality game for so long, that I've become completely immersed in it, believing the game to be real until someone takes me out of it." That one I don't think of so much as the Matrix, more like "20-something dude get's the latest in VR technology, then-Oh ****!-It literally takes over his life, to the point that he can't tell that it's just a game, and he actually believes he's 17 years old, typing to people he doesn't know on the internet."

Man, that would be cool.

homelessjunkeon wrote:Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

Why?

Kjell wrote:Kextor is wondering how the the original reality, the one that created our simulated reality, would react if we went and created a simulated reality of our own. Think of it as a snow bubble inside another snow bubble.

Assuming that we are a simulated reality, of course.

Ooo.. now I understand.. I think.. it's a bit confusing.
But still I don't think that's true.

Kjell wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

Why?

Because it's pretty pointless discussing something that can neither be proven, nor disproven.
Since we're the subject of doubting our perceptions I brought up Cartesian Doubt, since that's the only logical conclusion that such a discussion could possibly lead to.

homelessjunkeon wrote:Because it's pretty pointless discussing something that can neither be proven, nor disproven.
Since we're the subject of doubting our perceptions I brought up Cartesian Doubt, since that's the only logical conclusion that such a discussion could possibly lead to.

Certainly. Just blurting out with "I think, therefore I am" was a bit puzzling however...

But it's not "pointless" to discuss something that can't be proven or disproven, because good, well-argued debate can at least open up one's eyes to other avenues of thought, different opinions, varying notions, etc. That can be rewarding in itself, whether or not a conclusion or definitive answer is actually reached.

homelessjunkeon wrote:

Kjell wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

Why?

Because it's pretty pointless discussing something that can neither be proven, nor disproven.
Since we're the subject of doubting our perceptions I brought up Cartesian Doubt, since that's the only logical conclusion that such a discussion could possibly lead to.

Here's something they taught me in my pilosophy class, which relates directly to the Doubt of Perception:

How do I know you're real? You can say you're real, but how can I tell you're real, and not just some mind game played by some Penultimate Being?

See, that's how you shoot down Cogito Ergo Sum.

Shadowman wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:

Kjell wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

Why?

Because it's pretty pointless discussing something that can neither be proven, nor disproven.
Since we're the subject of doubting our perceptions I brought up Cartesian Doubt, since that's the only logical conclusion that such a discussion could possibly lead to.

Here's something they taught me in my pilosophy class, which relates directly to the Doubt of Perception:

How do I know you're real? You can say you're real, but how can I tell you're real, and not just some mind game played by some Penultimate Being?

See, that's how you shoot down Cogito Ergo Sum.

That depends on what one's definition of "real" is, though. Your statement asks, "How can I tell you're real?" but that question works on the assumption that the "I" in the sentence (i.e., you) is certain of its (your) self being real. How do you know you're real? Or, "How do I know I'm real?"

Leonardo wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:

Kjell wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

Why?

Because it's pretty pointless discussing something that can neither be proven, nor disproven.
Since we're the subject of doubting our perceptions I brought up Cartesian Doubt, since that's the only logical conclusion that such a discussion could possibly lead to.

Here's something they taught me in my pilosophy class, which relates directly to the Doubt of Perception:

How do I know you're real? You can say you're real, but how can I tell you're real, and not just some mind game played by some Penultimate Being?

See, that's how you shoot down Cogito Ergo Sum.

That depends on what one's definition of "real" is, though. Your statement asks, "How can I tell you're real?" but that question works on the assumption that the "I" in the sentence (i.e., you) is certain of its (your) self being real. How do you know you're real? Or, "How do I know I'm real?"

"I think, therefore, I am." That only works on individuals. I can say I'm real, and have all confidence that I am. You can say it, and I will instantly doubt you.

It's all very hypocritical.

Shadowman wrote:

Leonardo wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:

Kjell wrote:

homelessjunkeon wrote:Cogito Ergo Sum. Thread over.

Why?

Because it's pretty pointless discussing something that can neither be proven, nor disproven.
Since we're the subject of doubting our perceptions I brought up Cartesian Doubt, since that's the only logical conclusion that such a discussion could possibly lead to.

Here's something they taught me in my pilosophy class, which relates directly to the Doubt of Perception:

How do I know you're real? You can say you're real, but how can I tell you're real, and not just some mind game played by some Penultimate Being?

See, that's how you shoot down Cogito Ergo Sum.

That depends on what one's definition of "real" is, though. Your statement asks, "How can I tell you're real?" but that question works on the assumption that the "I" in the sentence (i.e., you) is certain of its (your) self being real. How do you know you're real? Or, "How do I know I'm real?"

"I think, therefore, I am." That only works on individuals. I can say I'm real, and have all confidence that I am. You can say it, and I will instantly doubt you.

It's all very hypocritical.

Yes, that's very true.

I always thought "I think, therefore I am" was rather presumptuous, in a way. The two don't go hand in hand.

Just to say "I think, therefore I am" only goes so far as to state that one exists consciously in some form. The possibilities for what the form actually is in "reality" is unimaginable/infinite.

Even just looking at "face value," there's hundreds of recognized definitions for "self" in human understanding.

True. I suppose one has to define what constitutes as "being" (in other words, what makes up the "am" in that famous quote). The conscious existence is, as you say, perhaps the best definition.

Shadowman wrote:Here's something they taught me in my pilosophy class, which relates directly to the Doubt of Perception:

How do I know you're real? You can say you're real, but how can I tell you're real, and not just some mind game played by some Penultimate Being?

See, that's how you shoot down Cogito Ergo Sum.

Actually that is precisely the line of reasoning that led DeCartes to his conclusion that the only thing he couldn't doubt was his own existence in some form or another.