What is it about?
Nick Bostrom and David Chalmers, two of the most influential philosophers in our time, argued that we are most likely living in a computer simulation. They proposed different versions of simulation and claimed that we might be living in one of them. But I show in my paper that the idea that we are in some of these simulations is incoherent, thereby refuting the claim that we live in some of these simulations. My refutation demonstrates that the answer to the question whether we are in some simulation deeply hinges on how we are to understand the very idea that we are in this simulation.
Featured Image
Photo by Aedrian on Unsplash
Why is it important?
This article shows, the idea that we are living in some simulation, like the notion of rounded square, cannot actually be thought.
Perspectives
The arguments employed in this paper can be regarded as transcendental arguments. They are deeply inspired by the book The Limits of Realism, written by Tim Button.
Abraham Lim
Universitat zu Koln
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Why We Are Not Living in a Computer Simulation, International Journal for the Study of Skepticism, October 2022, Brill,
DOI: 10.1163/22105700-bja10037.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
