The Simulation Argument🔒 SSL Verified

Table of Contents

• ↓ Are You Living In a Computer Simulation? Original
• ↓ Some Popular Synopses
• ↓ Frequently asked questions
• ↓ Scholarly commentaries and follow-on studies
• ↓ Some background readings
• ↓ About
• ↓ Top Alternatives to simulation-argument.com

6-Month Traffic Trend Estimate

Visual representation extracted from simulation-argument.com

Content Snippets from simulation-argument.com

"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."

"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."

"Uses the claim make by Greene (2018) - that spawning simulations would expose the simulating civilization to termination risk - to argue that civilizations have reason not to create simulations, and that therefore they don’t. And hence that the second disjunct in the original simulation argument (i.e. strong convergence towards simulation abstinence) is true. Note however that for this to work the convergence would have to be very strong: if even a tiny fraction of posthuman civilizations value creating simulations more than they value reducing their own termination risk, or if some members of such civilizations occasionally create ancestor simulations despite this going against the interests of their wider civilization, then most people like us could still be simulated."

"Argues that there may well exist a normative structure, based on the preferences or concordats of a “cosmic host” - which could include simulators and/or other superbeings. Suggests that we may have moral as well as prudential reason to favor paths that lead with relatively high surety to the creation of superintelligence that becomes a good cosmic citizen – i.e. that conforms to cosmic norms and contributes positively to this wider cosmopolis."

Key Topics & Focus Areas for simulation-argument.com:

Are You Living In a Computer Simulation? Original

Some Popular Synopses

Frequently asked questions

Scholarly commentaries and follow-on studies

Some background readings

About