Isn't that the most fucking arrogant argument you've heard?
"Well, all civilizations get to this advanced stage and would run these ancestor simulations, and because they would run so many of them, odds are that we're in one of them right now."
Okay, now let's imagine a creature called a Gorlok, and it's bigger than the whole universe, and it, in fact, eats universes. We could fit like five universes inside a Gorlok belly. Now, because of how big a Gorlok belly is, odds are that we are inside one right now, so therefore, Gorloks must exist, right?
How is that an arrogant argument in any way. It just states that if a technological civililzation reaches a point where it can make ancestor simulations, there is a nonzero chance they will make one. If one of the following propositions is true, it is overwhelmingly likely we are living in a simulation.
"The fraction of human-level civilizations that reach a posthuman stage (that is, one capable of running high-fidelity ancestor simulations) is very close to zero", or
"The fraction of posthuman civilizations that are interested in running ancestor-simulations is very close to zero", or
"The fraction of all people with our kind of experiences that are living in a simulation is very close to one"
Because it's heaven for people who believe in scientism.
It just states that if a technological civililzation reaches a point where it can make ancestor simulations, there is a nonzero chance they will make one
That's not one but two incredibly arrogant assumptions about the future and even the nature of life itself, and somehow being made with zero evidence put forward in support of the existence of ancestor simulations. The amount of assumptions being made, and then basing probabilities off of things that were assumed, is bad philosophy.
It is a counter-factual, and it ignores any of a hypothetically vast number of possibilities that preclude or exclude ancestor simulations from existing at all, ever. The fact that this gets put forward as a solution to the Fermi paradox (we can't see the aliens because we're already in their simulations!) is even more arrogant - it's people reaching for the answers that they want to be true - that death isn't final or that high-tech civilization is possible and maybe only one lifetime away // while the conditions if those things were simply not true would look exactly the same to us here.
If we were living in, a highly accurate, ancestor simulation, and we came to the conclusion that we were living inside a simulation - would that then reflect that our ancestors thought that they were inside a simulation, when they, in fact, weren't, because they were the first? What then to ascribing the probabilities of something that necessarily exists (humans thinking they might be in a simulation) versus something that may not and may have never existed, for which no evidence is being supplied (ancestor simulations).
It's worth noting the simulation hypothesis is really just the claim that "unless we are now living in a simulation, our descendants will almost certainly never run an ancestor-simulation", which is valid. (This is not how the Redditor conveyed it, but w/e.)
Consider this scenario. There are 10 people in separate rooms, all isolated from each other, all of whom know the conditions of the game. A fair coin is flipped in secret. If it comes up heads, one person is asked what the probability of the coin coming up heads was. If it comes up tails, all ten people are asked. What probability should they assign?
[deleted] · 3 points · Posted at 01:02:53 on April 12, 2018 · (Permalink)
tbf the idea is that it's a trilemma of sorts, and that at least one of three things must be true. IIRC the original argument didn't actually claim "omg we're totes in the matrix lol" it was more like "hey IF these things are true then we're totes in the matrix lol, so either we're totes in the matrix lol OR one of these things must be false". Of course, the Redditor version is "omg we're totes in the matrix lol", which assumes a lot.
The allegory for the cave is that we're all living in a literal giant cave and we just don't know it because our caves on Earth don't look like the giant cave we're living in (which is why it's so dark in space, just like caves)
Take a shot for every Plato's cave, trolley problem, any mention of solipsism and nihilism, and any misunderstand out of context Nietzsche or Schopenhauer
[deleted] · 5 points · Posted at 19:10:03 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Holy shit, I really don't get you. Because few dudes discuss not even seriously you have to get so (God forgive me for using this cursed word) trigged?
Even if this idea is bad philosophy or whatever it is a) fun to think about it and b) still possible. All I see is you being butthurt because someone is having fun
[deleted] · 31 points · Posted at 18:52:58 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Saved comment
[deleted] · 124 points · Posted at 01:38:21 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
every time someone says we live in a simulation take a shot
cazoix · 42 points · Posted at 02:00:04 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
A real shot. With a gun.
squareblob · 29 points · Posted at 04:13:00 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
I wont die because we are in a simulation
Shamrodia · 7 points · Posted at 13:33:24 on April 12, 2018 · (Permalink)
If you die in the simulation, you die in real life!
0ooo · 26 points · Posted at 01:41:28 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Only do this if you want alcohol poisoning
IronVanguard · 40 points · Posted at 04:44:07 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
That doesn't matter because we're in a simulation.
0ooo · 9 points · Posted at 04:56:11 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
mrw
theDashRendar · 54 points · Posted at 06:12:39 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Isn't that the most fucking arrogant argument you've heard?
"Well, all civilizations get to this advanced stage and would run these ancestor simulations, and because they would run so many of them, odds are that we're in one of them right now."
Okay, now let's imagine a creature called a Gorlok, and it's bigger than the whole universe, and it, in fact, eats universes. We could fit like five universes inside a Gorlok belly. Now, because of how big a Gorlok belly is, odds are that we are inside one right now, so therefore, Gorloks must exist, right?
waynesworldtwo · 25 points · Posted at 11:02:12 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
r/badphilosophy
ADD_Booknerd · 12 points · Posted at 12:28:49 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Psst, that’s where you are.
shalashaskka · 12 points · Posted at 14:25:49 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
And the cycle is complete, yeah.
ludwig_kittgenstein · 7 points · Posted at 16:06:41 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
You could make a religion out of this.
I_FUCK_THOTS · 12 points · Posted at 17:14:30 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
No don't
quodo1 · 2 points · Posted at 10:53:53 on April 12, 2018 · (Permalink)
Then stop having intercourse with baboon or ibis gods.
Orrieboy · -8 points · Posted at 14:15:59 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
How is that an arrogant argument in any way. It just states that if a technological civililzation reaches a point where it can make ancestor simulations, there is a nonzero chance they will make one. If one of the following propositions is true, it is overwhelmingly likely we are living in a simulation.
"The fraction of human-level civilizations that reach a posthuman stage (that is, one capable of running high-fidelity ancestor simulations) is very close to zero", or
"The fraction of posthuman civilizations that are interested in running ancestor-simulations is very close to zero", or
"The fraction of all people with our kind of experiences that are living in a simulation is very close to one"
theDashRendar · 24 points · Posted at 17:50:59 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Because it's heaven for people who believe in scientism.
That's not one but two incredibly arrogant assumptions about the future and even the nature of life itself, and somehow being made with zero evidence put forward in support of the existence of ancestor simulations. The amount of assumptions being made, and then basing probabilities off of things that were assumed, is bad philosophy.
It is a counter-factual, and it ignores any of a hypothetically vast number of possibilities that preclude or exclude ancestor simulations from existing at all, ever. The fact that this gets put forward as a solution to the Fermi paradox (we can't see the aliens because we're already in their simulations!) is even more arrogant - it's people reaching for the answers that they want to be true - that death isn't final or that high-tech civilization is possible and maybe only one lifetime away // while the conditions if those things were simply not true would look exactly the same to us here.
If we were living in, a highly accurate, ancestor simulation, and we came to the conclusion that we were living inside a simulation - would that then reflect that our ancestors thought that they were inside a simulation, when they, in fact, weren't, because they were the first? What then to ascribing the probabilities of something that necessarily exists (humans thinking they might be in a simulation) versus something that may not and may have never existed, for which no evidence is being supplied (ancestor simulations).
Veedrac · 6 points · Posted at 23:16:04 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
It's worth noting the simulation hypothesis is really just the claim that "unless we are now living in a simulation, our descendants will almost certainly never run an ancestor-simulation", which is valid. (This is not how the Redditor conveyed it, but w/e.)
Consider this scenario. There are 10 people in separate rooms, all isolated from each other, all of whom know the conditions of the game. A fair coin is flipped in secret. If it comes up heads, one person is asked what the probability of the coin coming up heads was. If it comes up tails, all ten people are asked. What probability should they assign?
[deleted] · 3 points · Posted at 01:02:53 on April 12, 2018 · (Permalink)
tbf the idea is that it's a trilemma of sorts, and that at least one of three things must be true. IIRC the original argument didn't actually claim "omg we're totes in the matrix lol" it was more like "hey IF these things are true then we're totes in the matrix lol, so either we're totes in the matrix lol OR one of these things must be false". Of course, the Redditor version is "omg we're totes in the matrix lol", which assumes a lot.
FreeRobotFrost · 5 points · Posted at 20:27:02 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
I'm not quite sure how you've made the jump from "non-zero" to "overwhelmingly likely".
[deleted] · 13 points · Posted at 21:24:11 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
DAE think the Matrix influenced Descartes?
freddy_meumer · 52 points · Posted at 07:16:51 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
I swear to god, if I hear the words 'optimistic nihilism' again...
chloapsoap · 2 points · Posted at 02:37:25 on April 14, 2018 · (Permalink)
Every time I hear that term it makes me want to vomit on my own shirt
0ooo · 54 points · Posted at 01:18:36 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Asking the important questions.
vladesko · 14 points · Posted at 07:33:32 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
*Laughs in Brazilian*
[deleted] · 2 points · Posted at 19:34:10 on April 12, 2018 · (Permalink)
We're in America. Use the H.
vladesko · 2 points · Posted at 23:00:02 on April 12, 2018 · (Permalink)
"Lhaughs"? "Hin"? "Brazilhian"?
[deleted] · 3 points · Posted at 23:17:22 on April 12, 2018 · (Permalink)
Jhjhjhjhjh
It was a meme I saw on the Twitter.
Danzzles · 41 points · Posted at 09:58:13 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
A bunch of non philosophical concepts 4k upvotes
Someone mentions solipsism 145 upvotes
:(
Catfish3 · 62 points · Posted at 01:26:30 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
consciousness debunked
Atsena · 28 points · Posted at 08:03:53 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Holy fucking shit, how is it even possible to misunderstand Plato's allegory of the cave this badly
FreeRobotFrost · 19 points · Posted at 20:28:57 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
The allegory for the cave is that we're all living in a literal giant cave and we just don't know it because our caves on Earth don't look like the giant cave we're living in (which is why it's so dark in space, just like caves)
bunker_man · 19 points · Posted at 05:25:45 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
What I assume people look like when they tell me that they think strong emergence explains consciousness.
voidrex · 19 points · Posted at 10:36:03 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Every time I see these threads I want to comment some really mundane concept philosophers use to explain other things, like supervenience
AllieLikesReddit · 16 points · Posted at 17:41:27 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Take a shot for every Plato's cave, trolley problem, any mention of solipsism and nihilism, and any misunderstand out of context Nietzsche or Schopenhauer
[deleted] · 5 points · Posted at 19:10:03 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
[deleted]
kaladyr · 3 points · Posted at 23:20:31 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
.
Mwstriker98 · 13 points · Posted at 02:54:26 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
No thanks. I don't want to die.
The_Anarcheologist · 11 points · Posted at 02:29:23 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Ooh boy, this may call for cracking open an Evil Twin Imperial Donut Break.
Slow_push · -17 points · Posted at 18:49:17 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
Holy shit, I really don't get you. Because few dudes discuss not even seriously you have to get so (God forgive me for using this cursed word) trigged?
Even if this idea is bad philosophy or whatever it is a) fun to think about it and b) still possible. All I see is you being butthurt because someone is having fun
[deleted] · 31 points · Posted at 18:52:58 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
[deleted]
Slow_push · -5 points · Posted at 18:59:19 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
k
kaladyr · 9 points · Posted at 23:23:44 on April 11, 2018 · (Permalink)
.