RE: Are we all just part of a computer simulation? Scientists are trying to find that out.
December 17, 2012 at 4:44 pm
(This post was last modified: December 17, 2012 at 4:45 pm by Rhizomorph13.)
(December 17, 2012 at 2:17 pm)Brian37 Wrote: ...You are attempting to shift the burden of proof and I don't give one fuck what the topic is.
Brian,
I don't think anyone is trying to unfairly shift the burden of proof. People are just bringing up the old "head in a jar" aka solipsistic philosophical problem. The fact is that you can't proove that this reality is real because to do so would require reference to something outside this reality which, I believe, is not possible because "this" is the only reality that "is".
BTW you shoulder the burden of proof when you say things like this:
(December 17, 2012 at 1:39 pm)Brian37 Wrote: ...A COGNITION IS NOT REQUIRED for the universe to exist therefore IT CANNOT BE A SIMULATION, anymore than a hurricane is a "simulation"...
To break that down into a syllogism:
Proposition: A cognition is not required for a universe to exist
Conclusion: Therefore it cannot be a simulation
As infered by the similarities to: A hurricane
The problem I see is that the proposition falls on its ear because it is just an assumption. Therefore the conclusion is not sound. Your proposition seems to be predicated from your epistemology which starts with the assumption that reality is real. I share that epistemology but have come to the conclusion that it is a basic belief rather than a scientifically supportable fact.
