What do you guys think about (the philosophically relevant thus literature related) Simulation Theory?
Almost always simulation theory discussions on Veeky Forums always devolve into "Dude matrix"--but do you actually know the axioms of simulation theory? If you did, I don't think you'd think it's such a stupid concept.
The following are the only possibilities that can be for our current reality:
1. No life form in the universe has ever been able to get so technologically advanced as to be able to create a replica/simulation of the universe--or they experience species extinction before they are able
2. Life forms have been able to replicate universes, but choose not to on ethical grounds of some sort
3. Life forms have created simulations, and if that is true--they'd have the power to create billions and trillions of simulations simultaneously, thus the chances of not being in a simulation is close to zero.
I honest to god think some people are just oblivion-tier NPCs walking around with no ability of critical thought, self awareness, or higher sentience. Mimics; without a single independent thought in their minds.
Know what's interesting? Let's pretend you don't find simulation theory valid--people do run on biological "scripts" aka D.N.A. and behavourism.
Fascinating vein of thought. What do you think?
Blake Taylor
what are the consequences for you as an individual if it were true?
Sebastian Butler
>there is no free will
Get away from me Satan.
Landon Diaz
>I honest to god think some people are just oblivion-tier NPCs walking around with no ability of critical thought, self awareness, or higher sentience. How is this implied by simulation theory? Shouldn't every human be given equal sentience by the simulation? >Let's pretend you don't find simulation theory valid--people do run on biological "scripts" aka D.N.A. and behavourism. What alternative could there be that doesn't equate to a script on some level? If it is to be used as evidence that we are in a simulation, you imply there has to be one if the hypothetical creators of the simulation (in the realest reality, since simulations could be nested) don't follow such a script.
Angel Adams
Means I'm playing a game right now...sims tier, except getting people to do what you want is extremely hard
>How is this implied by simulation theory? Shouldn't every human be given equal sentience by the simulation? It's obvious some creatures you have better A.I. than others--just look at animals you fucken stupid idiot.
>you imply I didn't imply anything you dumb fuckin idiot, I'm not enjoying replying to you--you're just a fucken idiot.
Lincoln Williams
/v/, please go back to your pissbottle filled lair.
Connor Martin
You actually expect people to take you seriously when you respond to posters like that?
Kayden Jenkins
I want to heavily discourage the typical semantic nit-picking, projection, false dilemma, and other logical fallacies (aka rhetorical devices) that makes Veeky Forums a tiresome place to visit.
Nicholas Williams
>Veeky Forums >place to visit
Grayson Russell
I shit, you won unconditional victory over my boi pucci---what shall you do to me now?
Faggot.
Matthew Edwards
OP is a faggot
Ian Cook
>simulations are possible >therefore we must be in one
I'm not convinced by this leap.
Cooper Sanders
>I honest to god think some people are just oblivion-tier NPCs walking around with no ability of critical thought, self awareness, or higher sentience. Mimics; without a single independent thought in their minds.
Yeah, I'm glad we're not one of those SHEEPLE.
Alexander Turner
>Fascinating vein of thought It's not in the slightest, even if we ignore that your premise is intrinsically logically inconsistent. Much like with free will debate there is decidedly no practical consequences to any definite answer. Now stop shitting up my board with your teenage insights and delusions of grandeur and go away.
Nicholas Roberts
>they'd have the power to create billions and trillions of simulations simultaneously, That feels like an assumption.
Ian Diaz
>Semantic nit-picking instead of generating interesting thoughts on the subject of OP
Yep--certainly feels like I'm in an oblivion game right now with brianwashed academia peons.
Bentley Bennett
Hot damn, Veeky Forums btfo again.
Mason Jackson
Pretty much--I feel like an intellectual giant amongst you Arts majors.
Carter Turner
Take the redpill, you faggots.
Daniel Hall
this, unironically
Jason Morales
>I feel like an intellectual giant That's good, user. Feeling is important.
Ian Cook
In real life, a large number of the people on the bus really would be super stupid.
Nathan Jackson
>Know what's interesting? Let's pretend you don't find simulation theory valid--people do run on biological "scripts" aka D.N.A. and behavourism. >I want to heavily discourage the typical semantic nit-picking If you want to appeal to our body of scientific knowledge, what about cognitive research and studies of genetic interaction with environment?
Also, I don't think simulation theory adds anything to the discourse of what reality is like. It presupposes a metaphysical state of affairs in the claim that whatever we are, we are such things that can be inside simulations, there can be simulations, that spontaneity/chance do not exist (qua behaviorism) and more propositions that would be tedious to point out, and sense certainty has already been a topic heavily discussed throughout philosophy.