Life being a computer simulation ... options?

Question

There is no solid evidence to prove this theory wrong or right but there are specific points that bring life to the theory. According to philosophers and physicists life as we know it is just one big computer simulation ... kinda like a game of Sims. Where we are kind of like the Human Matrix and we are just a simulation within a program. De ja vu could be a piece of solid evidence as it can mean there is a scratch in the disk where it causes the software to jump forward then jump back to it's original "position". Another point is that all softwares have a limit on certain things. Like a video game has a limit on certain actions a character can do before it is physically impossible to complete the action - this is where the speed of light comes in. The speed of light is the fastest known thing to man and that acts as a limit as it is pretty much impossible to exceed the speed of light.

So my question is quite simply this: What are your thoughts on computer simulation?

Answer 1

Master;

I got the philosophers part from an Internet page where they stated everything I stated here.



~~~ That is what a Master does? Parrot some crap he's seen on some web page without checking anything, without even thinking for himself?

Know what philosophy is?;



Philosophy is 'original critical thought';



Critical Thinking Mini Lessons

http://www.skepdic.com/refuge/ctlessons.html



Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking

http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Educ/EducHare.htm



As opposed to the 'scholastic';



"..."philosophologists", a term coined by Robert Pirsig ("Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", "Lila") to denote people who study other people's philosophy but cannot do philosophy themselves. He also says that most people who consider themselves philosophers are actually philosophologists. The difference between a philosopher and a philosophologist is like the difference between an art and aesthetics; one does and the other studies what the other does and theorizes about it."





According to philosophers and physicists life as we know it is just one big computer simulation ...



~~~ "Just repeating" this, mindlessly, you have offered us such a pile of crap that you have lost all credibility, for the moment, anyway!

I didn't even need to read past that 'blatantly inaccurate garbage'! Anything that followed that act can't be much better!



Actually there is not one, credible philosopher or scientist who would support such an absurd hypothesis!

It is no more than bored idle speculation, mental masturbation!



"The great snare of thought is the uncritical acceptance of irrational assumptions!" - Will Durant

Answer 2

"According to philosophers." Oh yeah? Name them. You've never come within 25 miles of a book written by a philosopher, much less read one.



You're just another drunken babbler. Go away.

Answer 3

Computer simulations do not have awareness.

Answer 4

Just as those who claim any other god or non-natural entity affecting our universe, bold claims require bold proof. It's folly to just make up a "giant pink teddy bear orbiting Jupiter" story and claim it could be true simply because no one has proven otherwise.



Other than poorly acted movies, nothing exists to indicate the possibility whereas the concept of sentience defies it.

Answer 5

Im not sure if you have looked this up already (because it looks as though you have spent a lot of time thinking this through), however the argument for a brain in a vat holds similar propositions, conclusions and conditions. It would be worth looking at some of the philosophers which specifically focus on this...people such as:

- Descartes Meditations -> Cartesian skepticism

- Nozick

- Sosa

they provide some in depth understanding as an approach from the argument of the skeptic.