| Are You Living In a Computer Simulation? |  |
|||
| The Simulation Argument | ||||
|
|
|||
|
The original paper presenting the Simulation argument: |
|||
|
Are You Living In a Computer Simulation? Nick Bostrom. Philosophical Quarterly, 2003, Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255. [html] [pdf] (An earlier draft was circulated in 2001.) |
ABSTRACT. 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. | ||
|
Some popular synopses: |
|||
| Our Lives, Controlled From Some Guy’s Couch. John Tierny. New York Times, 14 August , 2007 NEW | Article in NY Times. And here's some recent coverage on MSNBC. | ||
|
Do we live in a computer simulation?. Nick Bostrom. New Scientist, Vol. 192, No. 2579, 19 November, pp. 38-39, 2006. [pdf] |
A very brief, popular synopsis of the former. But please read the original paper instead if you can. | ||
| David Chalmers interviewed on bloggingheads.com. NEW May 22, 2007 (audio) | David Chalmers, a philosopher at ANU, talks about the simulation argument and assigns 20% probability to being in a simulation. | ||
|
The Simulation Argument: Why the Probability that You are Living in the Matrix is Quite High. Nick Bostrom. Times Higher Educational Supplement, May 16, 2003. [html] (Has been translated into Spanish, Russian) |
Another popularization. | ||
|
Why Make a Matrix? And Why You Might Be In One. Nick Bostrom. Forthcoming in More Matrix and Philosophy: Revolutions and Reloaded Decoded, ed. William Irwin (Open Court, 2005). [html] |
Yet another popularization, for Matrix-aficionados. | ||
| A wiki devoted to the simulation argument created by Ivo Jansch. Check out the spooky YouTube video at http://www.simulism.org/Simulation. | |||
| Frequently asked questions: | |||
|
The Simulation Argument FAQ NEW. Nick Bostrom. 2008. [html] |
Answers to 16 common questions. |
||
|
Scholarly commentaries and follow-on studies: |
|||
| How to Live in a Simulation. Robin Hanson (2001) Journal of Evolution and Technology, Vol. 7. [html] [pdf] | ABSTRACT. If you might be living in a simulation then all else equal you should care less about others, live more for today, make your world look more likely to become rich, expect to and try more to participate in pivotal events, be more entertaining and praiseworthy, and keep the famous people around you happier and more interested in you. | ||
| Innocence Lost: Simulation Scenarios: Prospects and Consequences. Barry Dainton (2002, October), Draft. [pdf] | ABSTRACT. Those who believe suitably programmed computers could enjoy conscious experience of the sort we enjoy must accept the possibility that their own experience is being generated as part of a computerized simulation. It would be a mistake to dismiss this is just one more radical sceptical possibility: for as Bostrom has recently noted, if advances in computer technology were to continue at close to present rates, there would be a strong probability that we are each living in a computer simulation. The first part of this paper is devoted to broadening the scope of the argument: even if computers cannot sustain consciousness (as many dualists and materialists believe), there may still be a strong likelihood that we are living simulated lives. The implications of this result are the focus of the second part of the paper. The topics discussed include: the Doomsday argument, scepticism, the different modes of virtual life, transcendental idealism, the Problem of Evil, and simulation ethics. | ||
| Living in a Simulated Universe. John D. Barrow (2003, May), Draft. [pdf] | ABSTRACT. We explain why, if we live in a simulated reality, we might expect to see occasional glitches and small drifts in the supposed constants and laws of Nature over time. | ||
| Simulation Scenarios. Barry Dainton (2003, June), Powerpoint presentation. [ppt] | Covers many related issues, but may be hard to understand without the oral presentation that is meant to go with these 79 slides. | ||
| The Matrix as Metaphysics. David Chalmers (2003). [html] | On several Brains-in-vats and Matrix-like scenarios. Argues in support of what is also my contention, that the simulation-hypothesis is not a radical skeptical hypothesis. | ||
| Are You a Sim? Brian Weatherson (2003) Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 53: 425-31. [pdf] | Weatherson is prepared to accept the Simulation Argument up to, but not including, the final step, in which I use the Bland Principle of Indifference. In this paper, he examines four different ways to understand this principle and argues that none of them serves the purpose. (For my reply, see the paper below.) Note that Weatherson accepts the third disjunct in the conclusion of the Simulation Argument - i.e. that there are many more simulated human-like persons than non-simulated ones. By contrast, I do not accept this: I think we currently lack grounds for eliminating either of the three disjuncts. | ||
| The Simulation Argument: Reply to Weatherson. Nick Bostrom (2005) Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 55, No. 218, pp. 90-97. [pdf] | My reply to Weatherson's paper (above). I argue he has misinterpreted the relevant indifference principle and that he has not provided any sound argument against the correct interpretation, nor has he addressed the arguments for this principle that I gave in the original paper. There also a few words on the difference between the Simulation Argument and traditional brain-in-a-vat arguments, and on so-called epistemological externalism. | ||
| The Simulation Argument again. Anthony Brueckner (2008) Analysis, Vol. 68, No. 299, pp. 224-226. NEW | Short article by Brueckner in which he proffers "a new way of thinking about Bostrom's argument". (see below for my reply) | ||
| The Simulation Argument: Some Explanations. Nick Bostrom (2009) Analysis: in press [pdf] NEW | My response to Brueckner (above), in which I argue that he has misconstrued the simulation argument. I also argue that he is mistaken in his critique of the idea that simulated beings may themselves create ancestor-simulations. | ||
| Historical Simulations - Motivational, Ethical and Legal Issues. Peter S. Jenkins (2006) Journal of Futures Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 23-42. [pdf] | ABSTRACT. A future society will very likely have the technological ability and the motivation to create large numbers of completely realistic historical simulations and be able to overcome any ethical and legal obstacles to doing so. It is thus highly probable that we are a form of artificial intelligence inhabiting one of these simulations. To avoid stacking (i.e. simulations within simulations), the termination of these simulations is likely to be the point in history when the technology to create them first became widely available, (estimated to be 2050). Long range planning beyond this date would therefore be futile. | ||
|
Are we living in a Matrix? What Can Computers Tell Us About God?. Hooman Katarai (2004) Powerpoint presentation. [ppt] |
An MIT computer science grad student theologizes. | ||
I, Sim - An exploration of the Simulation Argument (2008) Anders Hammarstrom.[pdf] NEW
|
A student's MA thesis | ||
| Selected background readings: | |||
|
Traditional philosophical skepticism and brain-in-a-vat arguments:
On anticipated technological capability of running realistic simulations:
Existential Risks (How we could fail to develop the required technologies):
The methodology of observation selection effects:
Miscellaneous:
Some simulation-scenarios depicted in fiction:
|
|||
| Note: This is not a complete list. Others include Simulacron III (1963), aka Counterfeit World, by Daniel F. Galouye, which was made into the movie Welt Am Draht (1973) by Rainer Werner Fassbinder (The Thirteenth Floor was also based on Simulacron III); Exit to Reality (1997) by Edith Forbes; Otherland by Tad Williams (1996-2001); the film Dark City (1950, 1998); eXistenZ (film directed by David Cronenberg, 1999); many stories by Philip K. Dick; Realtime Interrupt (1995) by James P. Hogan, etc. etc. | |||
|
|
|
About the author Professor Nick Bostrom is Director of the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University. He previously taught at Yale. His research areas include philosophy of science, foundations of probability theory, ethics, and emerging technologies. Visit his homepage at: http://www.nickbostrom.com |
|
