[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 411 KB, 689x540, 1515857401128.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12069886 No.12069886 [Reply] [Original]

>Claim 1: There is a very good chance we will develop the technology to simulate a human mind eventually
>Claim 2: Running a human mind on a computer will eventually cost much less energy than a biological brain consumes
>Claim 3: Future civilizations will run myriads of these simulation, because it's easy and useful
>Mathematical Fact: If there are an uncountable number of these simulations, but only one physical reality, the likelihood an observer lives in that physical base reality is nearly zero
>Conclusion: Statistically it's a thing of near certainty that we exist within a simulation.

Just thinking about this logically turned me from agnostic atheist to simulationist. Materialists and physicalists have no justification not to believe in simulationism if they earnestly accept the consequences of their worldview. You could call the creator of this simulation "God", though obviously we can only guess at the intentions of this being. They may be a regular human, or so far removed from humanity that their moral system is non-existent or nonsensical to us. Simulationism could be called a form of deism following this line of thought. Guess I'm religious now.

Are there philosophers - and I mean actual philosophers, not pop-sci pundits - that explore this argument in depth?

>> No.12069889
File: 39 KB, 575x556, 1506088925770.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12069889

>>12069886
>Claim 1: There is a very good chance we will develop the technology to simulate a human mind eventually

>> No.12069895

>>12069889
I don't want this to devolve into an argument about dualism, which is why I explicitly specified materialists and physicalists in the OP.

>> No.12069898
File: 50 KB, 540x960, 1530277950476.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12069898

Who cares if it's a simulation? Just live according to your principles.

>> No.12069903

>>12069898
>Just bee yourself
Cute cat tho, my dude.

>> No.12069905
File: 25 KB, 250x241, 1505154062856.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12069905

>>12069895
It's not true either way. You are literally falling for sensationalist low IQ clickbait.

>> No.12069906
File: 211 KB, 1600x1200, 1520279376941.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12069906

>>12069903
If you don't like yourself, change your principles to become someone you want to be.
Unfortunately it's not my cat.

>> No.12069910

the brain does not work like a computer, we barely understand it and trying to make predictions about our ability to simulate it is pointless

>> No.12069918

>>12069905
Do you have any arguments yourself or do you think posting stale memes absolves you from proper discourse?

>>12069910
No, it doesn't work like a computer, but there's nothing to suggest that it doesn't work according to the physical principles we are familiar with. That puts the brain solidly
in the "we can simulate it if we have enough processing power" category.

>> No.12069940

>Claim 1: There is a very good chance we will develop the technology to simulate a human mind eventually
All cool things in machine learning is either good old fashion AI or competitive self-play. We are so far from this and will probably never get there.

>> No.12069941
File: 95 KB, 694x1500, AFD1E1C7-F992-49CB-8E87-30A805D33B70.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12069941

>>12069886
Kek, look at this gay OP

>> No.12069949

>>12069886
>Future civilizations will run myriads of these simulation, because it's easy and useful
Useful for what? Solving Space CAPTCHAs? It seems more likely that you'd want specialised AI that can do a job well rather than pretending to be a human fuckup.
Which in turn puts doubt on the former points: I doubt anyone will develop such a thing, never mind mass-produce them, because they aren't going to be useful.

>> No.12069974

>>12069886
If we can postulate fictional magical technology, then I postulate that it's possible to create entirely new universes. If this is possible, the probability that we live in the "original" universe is nearly zero, and our universe was created by advanced life in another.

See this: http://evodevouniverse.com/wiki/Cosmological_natural_selection_(fecund_universes)

>> No.12069979
File: 102 KB, 814x336, 154180963764.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12069979

>>12069949
If you look at our world, it's obviously optimized to maximize the production of dank memes. We're just fueling the larger meme economy in the original universe.

>> No.12069993

>>12069979
Why would you simulate a human mind instead of writing the specialised Dankatron 5000 Memeputer software?

>> No.12070014
File: 58 KB, 1280x720, Laughing.jpg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12070014

>>12069993
Because no automatic system can be as hilariously absurd as us.

>> No.12070019

No one would simulate a conscious human mind, it's just never the most functional option for anything. Even if somebody was to do it regardless, I'm sure it works get outlawed. Ethics in science today are extremely strict

>> No.12070053

>>12069886

>Claim 1: There is a very good chance we will develop the technology to simulate a human mind eventually

Anyone who knows anything about either computers or minds know that the chances are not that good at all