simulat argumen

redhandsbluehands

redhandsbluehands

?Undercover?
Joined
May 11, 2020
Posts
3,089
Reputation
5,838
The Simulation Argument
Here you can peruse the debate that followed the paper presenting the simulation argument. The original paper is here, as are popular synopses, scholarly papers commenting or expanding on or critiquing the first paper, and some replies by the author. The simulation argument continues to attract a great deal of attention. I apologize for not usually being able to respond to individual inquiries. I hope you might find what you're looking for on this page.
Are You Living In a Computer Simulation? ORIGINAL
HTML PDF
Nick Bostrom. Philosophical Quarterly, 2003, Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255. (An earlier draft was circulated in 2001)


This paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. It follows that the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor-simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation. A number of other consequences of this result are also discussed.
"The Simulation Argument is perhaps the first interesting argument for the existence of a Creator in 2000 years."- David Pearce (exaggerated compliment)
"Thank you so much, Dr. Bostrom. You have proved that my psychiatrist was wrong all along."- Anonymous correpondent (misfiring compliment)
SOME POPULAR SYNOPSES
Nick Bostrom interviewed about the Simulation Argument
Philosophy Bites. 14 August, 2011
Interview for the Philosophy Bites podcast.
David Chalmers interviewed on bloggingheads.com
David Chalmers May 22, 2007
David Chalmers, a philosopher at ANU, talks about the simulation argument and assigns 20% probability to being in a simulation.
Discussion on the Simulation Argument for the AI Podcast with Lex Fridman
AI Podcast #83 with Lex Fridman March 25th, 2020

Are our heads in the cloud? Science fiction or fact?

Richard Dawkins
There is a powerful logical argument that they [simulators who constructed the reality we experience] could very possibly be science fact.
Our Lives, Controlled From Some Guy's Couch
John Tierny New York Times, 14 August, 2007
Article in NY Times
The Simulation Argument: Why the Probability that You are Living in the Matrix is Quite High.
Nick Bostrom Times Higher Educational Supplement, May 16, 2003
Another popularization. (Has been translated into Spanish, Russian.)
Do we live in a computer simulation?

Nick Bostrom New Scientist , Vol. 192, No. 2579, 19 November , pp. 38-39, 2006.
A very brief, popular synopsis. But please read the original paper (above) instead if you can.
Why Make a Matrix? And Why You Might Be In One.
Nick Bostrom In More Matrix and Philosophy: Revolutions and Reloaded Decoded, ed. William Irwin (Open Court, 2005).
Yet another popularization, for Matrix-aficionados.
Explained by Elon Musk.
Vox 2016

Video interview of Nick Bostrom on the Simulation Argument
Adam Ford February 2013

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
The Simulation Argument FAQ
Nick Bostrom 2011
Answers to 16 common questions.
SCHOLARLY COMMENTARIES AND FOLLOW-ON STUDIES
How to Live in a Simulation
HTML PDF
Robin Hanson Journal of Evolution and Technology, Vol. 7, 2001
If you might be living in a simulation then all else equal you should care less about others, live more for today, make your world look more likely to become rich, expect to and try more to participate in pivotal events, be more entertaining and praiseworthy, and keep the famous people around you happier and more interested in you.
The Matrix as Metaphysics
David Chalmers 2003
On several Brains-in-vats and Matrix-like scenarios. Argues in support of what is also my contention, that the simulation-hypothesis is not a radical skeptical hypothesis.
Innocence Lost: Simulation Scenarios: Prospects and Consequences
Barry Dainton Draft,2002
Those who believe suitably programmed computers could enjoy conscious experience of the sort we enjoy must accept the possibility that their own experience is being generated as part of a computerized simulation. It would be a mistake to dismiss this is just one more radical sceptical possibility: for as Bostrom has recently noted, if advances in computer technology were to continue at close to present rates, there would be a strong probability that we are each living in a computer simulation. The first part of this paper is devoted to broadening the scope of the argument: even if computers cannot sustain consciousness (as many dualists and materialists believe), there may still be a strong likelihood that we are living simulated lives. The implications of this result are the focus of the second part of the paper. The topics discussed include: the Doomsday argument, scepticism, the different modes of virtual life, transcendental idealism, the Problem of Evil, and simulation ethics.
Are You a Sim?
Brian Weatherson Philosophical Quarterly, 53: 425-31, 2003.
Weatherson is prepared to accept the Simulation Argument up to, but not including, the final step, in which I use the Bland Principle of Indifference. In this paper, he examines four different ways to understand this principle and argues that none of them serves the purpose. (For my reply, see the paper below.) Note that Weatherson accepts the third disjunct in the conclusion of the Simulation Argument - i.e. that there are many more simulated human-like persons than non-simulated ones. By contrast, I do not accept this: I think we currently lack grounds for eliminating either of the three disjuncts.
Living in a Simulated Universe.
John D. Barrow Universe or Multiverse? ed. Bernard Carr (Cambridge University Press): pp. 481-486, 2007
We explain why, if we live in a simulated reality, we might expect to see occasional glitches and small drifts in the supposed constants and laws of Nature over time.
The Simulation Argument: Reply to Weatherson.
Nick Bostrom Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 55, No. 218, pp. 90-97, 2005
My reply to Weatherson's paper (above). I argue he has misinterpreted the relevant indifference principle and that he has not provided any sound argument against the correct interpretation, nor has he addressed the arguments for this principle that I gave in the original paper. There also a few words on the difference between the Simulation Argument and traditional brain-in-a-vat arguments, and on so-called epistemological externalism.
Simulation Scenarios
Barry Dainton Powerpoint presentation, 2003
Covers many related issues, but may be hard to understand without the oral presentation that is meant to go with these 79 slides.
The Simulation Argument again.
Anthony Brueckner Analysis, Vol. 68, No. 3, pp. 224-226, 2008.
Short article by Brueckner in which he proffers "a new way of thinking about Bostrom's argument". (See below for my reply.)
The Simulation Argument: Some Explanations
Nick Bostrom Analysis, Vol. 69, No. 3, pp. 458-261, 2009
My response to Brueckner (above), in which I argue that he has misconstrued the simulation argument. I also argue that he is mistaken in his critique of the idea that simulated beings may themselves create ancestor-simulations.
Historical Simulations - Motivational, Ethical and Legal Issues
Peter S. Jenkins Journal of Futures Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 23-42, 2006
A future society will very likely have the technological ability and the motivation to create large numbers of completely realistic historical simulations and be able to overcome any ethical and legal obstacles to doing so. It is thus highly probable that we are a form of artificial intelligence inhabiting one of these simulations. To avoid stacking (i.e. simulations within simulations), the termination of these simulations is likely to be the point in history when the technology to create them first became widely available, (estimated to be 2050). Long range planning beyond this date would therefore be futile.
Are we living in a Matrix? What Can Computers Tell Us About God?
Hooman Katarai Powerpoint presentation, 2004
An MIT computer science grad student theologizes.
Theological Implications of the Simulation Argument
Eric Steinhart Ars Disputandi, Vol. 10, pp. 1566-5399, 2010
Nick Bostrom’s Simulation Argument (SA) has many intriguing theological implications. We work out some of them here. We show how the SA can be used to develop novel versions of the Cosmological and Design Arguments. We then develop some of the affinities between Bostrom’s naturalistic theogony and more traditional theological topics. We look at the resurrection of the body and at theodicy. We conclude with some reflections on the relations between the SA and Neoplatonism (friendly) and between the SA and theism (less friendly).
I, Sim - An exploration of the Simulation Argument
Anders Hammarstrom 2008
A student's MA thesis
A Patch for the Simulation Argument
Nick Bostrom & Marcin Kulczycki Analysis, Vol. 71, No., 1, pp. 54-61, 2011
This article reports on a newly discovered bug in the original simulation argument. Two different ways of patching the argument are proposed, each of which preserves the original conclusion.
Natural Evil and the Simulation Hypothesis
David Kyle Johnson Philo, Fall-Winter issue, Vol. 14, No. 2., 2011
Some theists maintain that they need not answer the threat posed to theistic belief by natural evil; they have reason enough to believe that God exists and it renders impotent any threat that natural evil poses to theism. Explicating how God and natural evil co-exist is not necessary since they already know both exist. I will argue that, even granting theists the knowledge they claim, this does not leave them in an agreeable position. It commits the theist to a very unpalatable position: our universe was not designed by God and is instead, most likely, a computer simulation.
Constraints on the Universe as a Numerical Simulation
Silas R. Beane, Zohreh Davoudi, Martin J. Savageavid 2012
A low-level physics simulation using the simplest simulation methods, which simulated our universe on a grid with finite resolution, would result in some potentially observable distortions of the simulated physics because of the rotational symmertry breaking effects of the simulation lattice. I would think that even the earlist simulations of systems sufficiently complex to contain observers would make use of powerful computational shortcuts that would eliminate the opportunity to observe any such discrepancies (mostly the simulation would take place at a much higher level of abstraction in order to reduce the computational demands).
On the 'Simulation Argument' and selective skepticism
Jonathan Birch Erkenntnis, Vol. 78, No. 1, pp. 95-107, 2013 (requires journal subscription)
Develops an objection similar to the one discussed under question 4 in the Q&A.
The Simulation Argument
William Eckhardt In Paradoxes in Probability Theory (Springer), chapter 4 (book link)
A critical discussion in the context of the doomsday argument.
The Doomsday Argument and the Simulation Argument
Peter J. Lewis Synthese, January 2013 (requires journal subscription)
Analyzes some analogies and disanalogies between the doomsday argument and the simulation argument, and concludes that the former fails whille the latter succeeds.
SOME BACKGROUND READINGS
Traditional philosophical skepticism and brain-in-a-vat arguments:Skepticism: A Contemporary Reader
DeRose, K. and Warfield, T. A. (eds.) Oxford University Press, Oxford. 1999.

On anticipated technological capability of running realistic simulations:Whole Brain Emulation: A Roadmap
Sandberg, A. and Bostrom, N. Technical Report #2008-3, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University, 2008
Minimum energy requirements of information transfer and computing.
Bremermann, H. J. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 21: 203-217, 1982
Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies
Bostrom, N. (2014) Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology.
Drexler, K. E. London, Forth Estate, 1985
How Long Before Superintelligence?
Bostrom, N. International Journal of Futures Studies, Vol. 2, 1998
Nanosystems: Molecular Machinery, Manufacturing, and Computation.
Drexler, K. E. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1999
Matrioshka Brains.
Drexler, K. E. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1992
Nanomedicine: Volume 1: Basic Capabilities.
Freitas, R. A. , Jr. Landes Bioscience, 1998
The Age of Spiritual Machines: When computers exceed human intelligence
Kurzweil, R.. New York, Viking, 1999
Ultimate physical limits to computation
Lloyd, S. Nature 406 (31 August): 1047-1054, 2000
Mind Children
Moravec, H. Harvard, Harvard University Press, 1989
Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind
Moravec, H. New York, Oxford University Press, 1999
Pigs in Cyberspace
Moravec, H. Extropy #10, Winter/Spring issue. 1993
The Physics of Information Processing Superobjects: The Daily Life among the Jupiter Brains
Sandberg, A. Journal of Evolution and Technology, Vol. 5., 1999
The Physics of Immortality
Frank J. Tipler Doubleday, 1994


Existential risks (How we could fail to develop the required technologies):
Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards
HTML PDF
Nick Bostrom Journal of Evolution and Technology, Vol. 9, 2002
Existential Risks Reduction as Global Priority
HTML PDF
Nick Bostrom Global Policy Journal, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 15-31, 2013
The methodology of observation selection effects:Anthropic Bias: Observation Selection Effects in Science and Philosophy
Nick Bostrom Routledge, New York. 2002
anthropic-principle.com
Nick Bostrom Website containing introductions and preprints
MiscellaneousThe Planetarium Hypothesis: A Resolution of the Fermi Paradox
Stephen Baxter Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 54, no. 5/6, pp. 210-216. 2001.


Some simulation-scenarios depicted in fiction:Bedlam
Christopher Brookmyre Novel, 2013
Permutation City
Greg Egan Novel 1995
The Matrix
Directed by Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski Film, parts I-III (1999-2003)
The Thirteenth Floor
Directed by Joseph Rusnak Film 1999
Vanilla Sky
Directed by Cameron Crowe Film, 2001, based on the film Open Your Eyes
Open Your Eyes (Abres los Ojos)
Directed by Alejandro Amenábar Film, 1997
I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility
Sam Hughes Short story, 2007
Welt am Draht
Directed by Rainer Fassbinder Film, 1973. (Trevor Levick suggests this might be the original of all Matrix-type films.)
Note: This is by no means a complete list. Some others include Simulacron III (1963), aka Counterfeit World, by Daniel F. Galouye, which was made into the movie Welt Am Draht (1973) by Rainer Werner Fassbinder (The Thirteenth Floor was also based on Simulacron III); Exit to Reality (1997) by Edith Forbes; Otherland by Tad Williams (1996-2001); the film Dark City (1950, 1998); eXistenZ (film directed by David Cronenberg, 1999); many stories by Philip K. Dick; Realtime Interrupt (1995) by James P. Hogan, etc. etc. Jay Shreib produced a play inspired by the simulation argument, World of Wires, which opened in New York in January 2012.
MISCELLANEOUS
World of Wires
A play inspired by the simulation argument, New York, 2012.

Nick Pasztor drops a beat
Simulation Argument (Extended Simulated Remix)

ABOUT
Nick Bostrom
Photo of Nick Bostrom
Photo credit: David Vintiner
Nick Bostrom is a professor at Oxford University, where he directs the Future of Humanity Institute (FHI). His homepage is at nickbostrom.com.
Bibliography
 
dn rd
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lev Peshkov
Dnrd
 
  • JFL
Reactions: recessed

Similar threads

L
Replies
4
Views
140
lilxder2
L
Iasacrko
Replies
44
Views
947
Kristin
Kristin
Iasacrko
Replies
11
Views
204
Skywalker
Skywalker
InnerVoid
Replies
8
Views
136
BoltzmannBrain19
BoltzmannBrain19
Hardrada
Replies
2
Views
99
ngannou
N

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top