• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The implications of reality being a simulation

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
If you ever come across some evidence that computer programs or human-made machines have experiences or are able to act volitionally, be sure to do this @Nous to alert me of it.

A conscious mind plugged the right way into a powerful enough computer could possibly experience a simulated reality.

Also, some robots have self-awareness, now who is to say they could never possess "consciousness".


 
Last edited:

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I'll watch your video later. Did you look up the study to learn what hypothesis was tested, how it was tested, and what conclusion was drawn?

What machine or computer program did the researchers test for the presence of experiences or volitional ability?

BTW, there are objective differences between voluntary acts and involuntary bodily movements. There is no reason to pretend that we can't determine the difference between them.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
I'll watch your video later. Did you look up the study to learn what hypothesis was tested, how it was tested, and what conclusion was drawn?

What machine or computer program did the researchers test for the presence of experiences or volitional ability?

BTW, there are objective differences between voluntary acts and involuntary bodily movements. There is no reason to pretend that we can't determine the difference between them.

Sorry, that video I'd posted my mistake.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
I made this thread to be about the human implications of people believing Simulism to be true - not about whether or not it is true.

Does anyone have any ideas about this that they'd wish to share?

Think of it as a thought experiment: turn your imaginations on and speculate!​
In theory, @Eddi a creative mind could take your question virtually anywhere it chose. The point is moot.
 

Eddi

Christianity
Premium Member
In theory, @Eddi a creative mind could take your question virtually anywhere it chose. The point is moot.

I see where you're coming from and have taken in what you've said.

I think the question could be posed so as not to be open ended, for instance by making it a "good" or "bad" affair, by phrasing it:

Would it be good or bad for humankind if significant numbers of people were to believe we are living in a simulation?

- which could be answered either "good" or "bad". This could be accompanied by key reasons. If people were to do this (as people already have) then it would be possible to compare the reasons people gave to either "good" or "bad", so as to identify issues and so increase our understanding of the problem. This would stop us being lumped with an unhelpful multitude of wildly different answers.​
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
What do people think the consequences would be of humankind believing itself (in considerable numbers) to live within a simulation? Regardless of whether or not this is the case. Here are my thoughts:

“Simulism” is the belief that we humans and our reality are somehow simulated, most likely by some kind of advanced computer the likes of which we cannot imagine let alone understand and think about. The creators of The Simulation would be a race of super-advanced beings.

But what if the whole world – or more realistically a significant portion of it – came to believe we were living in a simulation? In this post I shall discuss the consequences this would have on humankind.

If we are in The Simulation then what does that say about our humanity? One term that has been used is “virtual human”. Such beings would be reincarnated somewhere within The Simulation once they die. The workings of reincarnation would be done from behind a veil of ignorance but would be scrupulously fair and perhaps somehow related to our conduct? Unless it’s done by blind chance. But the thing is, either way we would not know where on Earth (or any other planet) we would be reincarnated, which would be a powerful reason to make the whole of our world a good place to live, lest one gets reborn in some horrid corner.

The realisation we are within a simulation would I believe have a unifying effect – as we would all be equal participants of The Simulation, regardless of race, sex, sexuality, or whatever. Also, as we die and are reborn we would exist as different races and sexes, meaning that (for instance) in one life one could be a man and in another a woman. This would I believe make people take racial and gender equality much more seriously and would result in a more equal society.

In some lives we would live in poor, undeveloped countries and in others we would live in a rich, highly developed country. I believe we’d take it in turns to live good lives and bad lives, so it would be in all our interests to make the whole wide world a better place in which to live as we don’t know in what part of it we’ll be born into in our next life.

So basically, if a great number of us believed we were living in a simulation the world would, due to rational self-interest, become an increasingly equal and developed place.

Assuming The Simulation is mechanical as opposed to organic then that would mean that the so-called “hard problem of consciousness” has been solved, by the creators of The Simulation. If of course there is a valid distinction to be made between “mechanical” and “organic”.

Hard problem of consciousness - Wikipedia

Premise 1: The hard problem of consciousness must be solved to produce sentient AI
Premise 2: We are sentient AI
Conclusion 1: Somewhere, the hard problem of consciousness has been solved.
Conclusion 2: Sentient AI is therefore possible.

This is at least valid!

This would mean that human civilization within The Simulation could someday produce sentient Artificial Intelligence. Unless of course we humans will always be much less able than the creators of The Simulation! But we can at least imagine as a possibility a future in which we can produce Artificial Consciousness within The Simulation. It would follow that such beings would also be citizens of The Simulation, which would mean in one life a person could be a human, and in another some kind of sentient “machine”.

What would happen to religion if significant numbers of people started to believe that we are living in a simulation? I think the world’s religions would continue, no doubt. And that most people would not believe we’re in a simulation, at least initially. But perhaps people would embrace Simulism as some kind of secular humanist philosophy? I think if Simulism were to become a philosophy rather than a hypothesis then the world would become a much better place, as I’ve previously explained.

But of course, it is still possible to believe in Simulism and a Supreme Being – it’s just that there’s an extra layer between humanity and the Supreme Being (namely The Simulation admin and its overseers). I personally believe in an ineffable God who rules over the whole of ultimate reality. And it is entirely possible that the influence of the Supreme Being reaches into The Simulation. But we could never understand this being – God – just as an ant cannot understand subtraction or grammar.

I don’t believe the world’s religions are lies, based on things done by The Simulation rather than God although I did use to. I do not believe, for instance, that The Simulation gave Moses the Ten Commandments, whilst pretending to be God. I believe all human religions arise from a mix of history, culture, myths, and the imagination, and various things that either didn’t happen or did, but were either added to and subtracted from later on. But I still believe in God – perhaps a Deist God?

To some, the Simulism hypothesis may sound bleak. I think it’s an uplifting idea and that if people came to believe in it the world would eventually become a better place. It would also mean that it is possible for a species to become ultra-advanced, which would give science and technology something to aspire to, to learn what the over-seers know. Perhaps some day we will become post-singularity space-faring post-human species, and become the equal to those who created The Simulation. But basically, I believe that the future of this planet, were people to believe in Simulism, would be a much happier one.

But of course, whether or not we’d like it to be true has nothing to do with whether or not it is!​

Say we're in a Matrix--this Matrix is one where there is an ongoing demand for moral accountability. Christianity still makes sense.
 

allfoak

Alchemist
What do people think the consequences would be of humankind believing itself (in considerable numbers) to live within a simulation? Regardless of whether or not this is the case. Here are my thoughts:

“Simulism” is the belief that we humans and our reality are somehow simulated, most likely by some kind of advanced computer the likes of which we cannot imagine let alone understand and think about. The creators of The Simulation would be a race of super-advanced beings.

But what if the whole world – or more realistically a significant portion of it – came to believe we were living in a simulation? In this post I shall discuss the consequences this would have on humankind.

If we are in The Simulation then what does that say about our humanity? One term that has been used is “virtual human”. Such beings would be reincarnated somewhere within The Simulation once they die. The workings of reincarnation would be done from behind a veil of ignorance but would be scrupulously fair and perhaps somehow related to our conduct? Unless it’s done by blind chance. But the thing is, either way we would not know where on Earth (or any other planet) we would be reincarnated, which would be a powerful reason to make the whole of our world a good place to live, lest one gets reborn in some horrid corner.

The realisation we are within a simulation would I believe have a unifying effect – as we would all be equal participants of The Simulation, regardless of race, sex, sexuality, or whatever. Also, as we die and are reborn we would exist as different races and sexes, meaning that (for instance) in one life one could be a man and in another a woman. This would I believe make people take racial and gender equality much more seriously and would result in a more equal society.

In some lives we would live in poor, undeveloped countries and in others we would live in a rich, highly developed country. I believe we’d take it in turns to live good lives and bad lives, so it would be in all our interests to make the whole wide world a better place in which to live as we don’t know in what part of it we’ll be born into in our next life.

So basically, if a great number of us believed we were living in a simulation the world would, due to rational self-interest, become an increasingly equal and developed place.

Assuming The Simulation is mechanical as opposed to organic then that would mean that the so-called “hard problem of consciousness” has been solved, by the creators of The Simulation. If of course there is a valid distinction to be made between “mechanical” and “organic”.

Hard problem of consciousness - Wikipedia

Premise 1: The hard problem of consciousness must be solved to produce sentient AI
Premise 2: We are sentient AI
Conclusion 1: Somewhere, the hard problem of consciousness has been solved.
Conclusion 2: Sentient AI is therefore possible.

This is at least valid!

This would mean that human civilization within The Simulation could someday produce sentient Artificial Intelligence. Unless of course we humans will always be much less able than the creators of The Simulation! But we can at least imagine as a possibility a future in which we can produce Artificial Consciousness within The Simulation. It would follow that such beings would also be citizens of The Simulation, which would mean in one life a person could be a human, and in another some kind of sentient “machine”.

What would happen to religion if significant numbers of people started to believe that we are living in a simulation? I think the world’s religions would continue, no doubt. And that most people would not believe we’re in a simulation, at least initially. But perhaps people would embrace Simulism as some kind of secular humanist philosophy? I think if Simulism were to become a philosophy rather than a hypothesis then the world would become a much better place, as I’ve previously explained.

But of course, it is still possible to believe in Simulism and a Supreme Being – it’s just that there’s an extra layer between humanity and the Supreme Being (namely The Simulation admin and its overseers). I personally believe in an ineffable God who rules over the whole of ultimate reality. And it is entirely possible that the influence of the Supreme Being reaches into The Simulation. But we could never understand this being – God – just as an ant cannot understand subtraction or grammar.

I don’t believe the world’s religions are lies, based on things done by The Simulation rather than God although I did use to. I do not believe, for instance, that The Simulation gave Moses the Ten Commandments, whilst pretending to be God. I believe all human religions arise from a mix of history, culture, myths, and the imagination, and various things that either didn’t happen or did, but were either added to and subtracted from later on. But I still believe in God – perhaps a Deist God?

To some, the Simulism hypothesis may sound bleak. I think it’s an uplifting idea and that if people came to believe in it the world would eventually become a better place. It would also mean that it is possible for a species to become ultra-advanced, which would give science and technology something to aspire to, to learn what the over-seers know. Perhaps some day we will become post-singularity space-faring post-human species, and become the equal to those who created The Simulation. But basically, I believe that the future of this planet, were people to believe in Simulism, would be a much happier one.

But of course, whether or not we’d like it to be true has nothing to do with whether or not it is!​
The simulation is organic.
Governed by a biofeedback mechanism many like to call karma.
The All is mind.
 

Eddi

Christianity
Premium Member
The simulation is organic.
Governed by a biofeedback mechanism many like to call karma.
The All is mind.

What do you think the human implications would be if this was believed by a significant number of people?
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
What do people think the consequences would be of humankind believing itself (in considerable numbers) to live within a simulation? Regardless of whether or not this is the case. Here are my thoughts:

“Simulism” is the belief that we humans and our reality are somehow simulated, most likely by some kind of advanced computer the likes of which we cannot imagine let alone understand and think about. The creators of The Simulation would be a race of super-advanced beings.

But what if the whole world – or more realistically a significant portion of it – came to believe we were living in a simulation? In this post I shall discuss the consequences this would have on humankind.

If we are in The Simulation then what does that say about our humanity? One term that has been used is “virtual human”. Such beings would be reincarnated somewhere within The Simulation once they die. The workings of reincarnation would be done from behind a veil of ignorance but would be scrupulously fair and perhaps somehow related to our conduct? Unless it’s done by blind chance. But the thing is, either way we would not know where on Earth (or any other planet) we would be reincarnated, which would be a powerful reason to make the whole of our world a good place to live, lest one gets reborn in some horrid corner.

The realisation we are within a simulation would I believe have a unifying effect – as we would all be equal participants of The Simulation, regardless of race, sex, sexuality, or whatever. Also, as we die and are reborn we would exist as different races and sexes, meaning that (for instance) in one life one could be a man and in another a woman. This would I believe make people take racial and gender equality much more seriously and would result in a more equal society.

In some lives we would live in poor, undeveloped countries and in others we would live in a rich, highly developed country. I believe we’d take it in turns to live good lives and bad lives, so it would be in all our interests to make the whole wide world a better place in which to live as we don’t know in what part of it we’ll be born into in our next life.

So basically, if a great number of us believed we were living in a simulation the world would, due to rational self-interest, become an increasingly equal and developed place.

Assuming The Simulation is mechanical as opposed to organic then that would mean that the so-called “hard problem of consciousness” has been solved, by the creators of The Simulation. If of course there is a valid distinction to be made between “mechanical” and “organic”.

Hard problem of consciousness - Wikipedia

Premise 1: The hard problem of consciousness must be solved to produce sentient AI
Premise 2: We are sentient AI
Conclusion 1: Somewhere, the hard problem of consciousness has been solved.
Conclusion 2: Sentient AI is therefore possible.

This is at least valid!

This would mean that human civilization within The Simulation could someday produce sentient Artificial Intelligence. Unless of course we humans will always be much less able than the creators of The Simulation! But we can at least imagine as a possibility a future in which we can produce Artificial Consciousness within The Simulation. It would follow that such beings would also be citizens of The Simulation, which would mean in one life a person could be a human, and in another some kind of sentient “machine”.

What would happen to religion if significant numbers of people started to believe that we are living in a simulation? I think the world’s religions would continue, no doubt. And that most people would not believe we’re in a simulation, at least initially. But perhaps people would embrace Simulism as some kind of secular humanist philosophy? I think if Simulism were to become a philosophy rather than a hypothesis then the world would become a much better place, as I’ve previously explained.

But of course, it is still possible to believe in Simulism and a Supreme Being – it’s just that there’s an extra layer between humanity and the Supreme Being (namely The Simulation admin and its overseers). I personally believe in an ineffable God who rules over the whole of ultimate reality. And it is entirely possible that the influence of the Supreme Being reaches into The Simulation. But we could never understand this being – God – just as an ant cannot understand subtraction or grammar.

I don’t believe the world’s religions are lies, based on things done by The Simulation rather than God although I did use to. I do not believe, for instance, that The Simulation gave Moses the Ten Commandments, whilst pretending to be God. I believe all human religions arise from a mix of history, culture, myths, and the imagination, and various things that either didn’t happen or did, but were either added to and subtracted from later on. But I still believe in God – perhaps a Deist God?

To some, the Simulism hypothesis may sound bleak. I think it’s an uplifting idea and that if people came to believe in it the world would eventually become a better place. It would also mean that it is possible for a species to become ultra-advanced, which would give science and technology something to aspire to, to learn what the over-seers know. Perhaps some day we will become post-singularity space-faring post-human species, and become the equal to those who created The Simulation. But basically, I believe that the future of this planet, were people to believe in Simulism, would be a much happier one.

But of course, whether or not we’d like it to be true has nothing to do with whether or not it is!​

Would there be a significant difference? Whether if we are made out of atoms or digital code shouldn´t change the fact that we will still try to live a good moral and happy life.

Perhaps the first generations would become crazy because of this novel idea, but in long term things would be similar regardless if we are physical or digital
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
The implications of reality being a simulation

Contradiction

Reality : the state of things as they actually exist,

Simulation : imitation of a situation or process.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
If it were a computer generated universe, then this is not base reality. And a civilization far more advanced then humanity would have superintelligence technology well beyond ever humanity could do. You would see evidence of that in nature.

The universe could be a natural computer with its own built in memory banks for all anybody knows.

Outside of James Gates calculations from super symmetry, how would you give evidence that the universe is a computational machine?

Super symmetry still is not a proven theory, and has very little in the way of testability from what i have read. Still that the math that jives qm with relativity must hold some truth to it and that it produces error correction codes must mean something. That is an astounding calculation.

The motives for building a universe such as ours would be to harvest and exploit it for its resources.

My conviction is that natural intelligence exists and that intelligence produces life alive through evolution.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Given that computer simulations are unable to act willfully or to experience whereas humans can act willfully and do experience; and given that there is no rational reason to conclude that computer simulations will ever be able to act willfully or experience, I conclude that there are no realistic implications of the proposition that "reality [is] a [computer] simulation," just as there are no realistic implications of the proposition that too many elephants may congregate on my eyeball.
How do you know that computer simulations can't act willfully -- or simulate willful acts?
Twenty years ago no-one would believe computers could do what they routinely do today.

The OP link basically said that because we don't currently have the IT capacity to create a simulated universe, it's doubtful one exists.
Human technology is a long series of 'impossible' achievements.
I haven't seen those studies demonstrating that computer programs have experiences or can act willfully. Please cite them.
So you assume we've achieved the apogee of computer technology; that future amazing breakthroughs are impossible? This reminds me of the famous -- if apocryphal -- statement by the commissioner of the patent office, Charles Duell, ca. 1900: "Everything that can be invented has been invented."
It's pretty conclusive as far as I'm concerned. It certainly is far more evidenced than what simulation proponents put forth which is pretty much zilch.
Proponents point out that the 'reality' we currently perceive is illusory; that it doesn't correlate with known physics. Doesn't this leaves open the possibility of a simulation?
I made this thread to be about the human implications of people believing Simulism to be true - not about whether or not it is true.

Does anyone have any ideas about this that they'd wish to share?

Think of it as a thought experiment: turn your imaginations on and speculate!​
No need to speculate. Many Hindus and Buddhists believe exactly this. They haven't all gone mad.
The idea of a simulation is pretty far-fetched to begin with considering it's already been conclusively proven it's not a simulation by the experts, and I'm not aware of any real additional proofs or conclusions to the contrary that there are even plausible alternates that could effectively create a simulation.
Nothing like this has been proven. What has been pretty well established is that our perception of reality is faulty. This leaves open the possibility of alternative realities -- including simulations.
You're talking about George Noory material here.
Actually we're talking about Albert Einstein, Neils Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg, &al.
 

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
How do you know that computer simulations can't act willfully -- or simulate willful acts?
I don't know what "simulate willful acts" means. But computer programs do not begin acting autonomously, such as in their own best interest. They continue following their program until something malfunctions.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I don't know what "simulate willful acts" means. But computer programs do not begin acting autonomously, such as in their own best interest. They continue following their program until something malfunctions.
A car that brakes itself when a collision appears imminent is simulating a willful, self-protective act.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
If we are in The Simulation then what does that say about our humanity? One term that has been used is “virtual human”. Such beings would be reincarnated somewhere within The Simulation once they die. The workings of reincarnation would be done from behind a veil of ignorance but would be scrupulously fair and perhaps somehow related to our conduct? Unless it’s done by blind chance. But the thing is, either way we would not know where on Earth (or any other planet) we would be reincarnated, which would be a powerful reason to make the whole of our world a good place to live, lest one gets reborn in some horrid corner.​


I don't see why people would be reincarnated if we were in a simulation. Why do you think that would be the case ?

The realisation we are within a simulation would I believe have a unifying effect – as we would all be equal participants of The Simulation, regardless of race, sex, sexuality, or whatever. Also, as we die and are reborn we would exist as different races and sexes, meaning that (for instance) in one life one could be a man and in another a woman. This would I believe make people take racial and gender equality much more seriously and would result in a more equal society.

I don't know about that. We are all humans and we can all become poor but even being aware of that doesn't eliminate social discriminations.

 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
I definitely need evidence in order to conclude that computer programs have experiences or act willfully. Apparently there is no study that demonstrates such, and therefore I know of no rational reason to conclude that computer programs have experiences of act willfully.

The funny part is that we can't be absolutely certain that someone else is having experiences or acting willfully. Not even if they are fellow human beings.
We just assume that to be case because of the similarities between ourselves. However, there is no test that could be performed to exclude the possibility of someone else being a philosophical zombie. "What a strange world we live in...".
 
Top