Simulation Theory “There’s a one in billions chance we’re in base reality,” claims Elon Musk, product architect of Tesla Inc., founder of SpaceX, and more. In recent years, the simulation-argument has gained serious traction as we further advance technologically, and intellectually. However, not everyone is on board with the “simulation argument”—a term coined by Nick Bostrom (Philosophy Professor at Oxford University) when he published a journal stating:
[A]t 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); …show more content…
He defers this probability stating that while simulated realities could potentially approach infinity, they are never infinite at any given point, therefore we have more than an infinitesimal chance of being base reality.
Weatherson further objects Bostrom’s trilemma with a story of “Rat”. He goes over and explains her entire day, then asks us if we took the set that contains all of humanity and filtered out all those that didn’t do what she did, would it just be her? It’s very unlikely someone else went through the same exact process as Rat did, yet it’s not impossible. However, if she were to consider that she’s simulated, she’d find out its very unlikely she’s really her. With Weatherson extends this to Bostrom’s trilemma saying that even though Bostrom’s argument is appealing, it’s fundamentally flawed.
Bostrom refutes Weatherson’s examples, and calls his first three interpretations red herrings since they had all generalized his propositions, therefore making them more vulnerable, and ultimately incorrect. Bostrom acknowledges Weatherson’s following interpretations as more accurate, yet still fundamentally
[A]t 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); …show more content…
He defers this probability stating that while simulated realities could potentially approach infinity, they are never infinite at any given point, therefore we have more than an infinitesimal chance of being base reality.
Weatherson further objects Bostrom’s trilemma with a story of “Rat”. He goes over and explains her entire day, then asks us if we took the set that contains all of humanity and filtered out all those that didn’t do what she did, would it just be her? It’s very unlikely someone else went through the same exact process as Rat did, yet it’s not impossible. However, if she were to consider that she’s simulated, she’d find out its very unlikely she’s really her. With Weatherson extends this to Bostrom’s trilemma saying that even though Bostrom’s argument is appealing, it’s fundamentally flawed.
Bostrom refutes Weatherson’s examples, and calls his first three interpretations red herrings since they had all generalized his propositions, therefore making them more vulnerable, and ultimately incorrect. Bostrom acknowledges Weatherson’s following interpretations as more accurate, yet still fundamentally