connick
Junior Member
Sorry for being absent recently.
What I think you might not agree with is what I've stated before, which is that if we assume we could be in a simulation, then all bets are off. Our ideas of awareness, existence, logic, etc., may be completely wrong. As I've also said before, I can't even begin to imagine what this would mean, but if everything is potentially a delusion, then even our sensation of awareness is vulnerable to doubt. I can't fathom a way in which I could feel aware but not truly be aware, but if there is some unknowable outside world, why not? Surely, my lack of imagination does not limit what could be true in an external world. Maybe logical concepts like identity, non-contradiction and the excluded middle don't hold true in the outer world. Something could be and not be at the same time. Maybe the very concept of "being" doesn't have a correlate in the outer world.
Because I axiomatically reject the possibility of being in a simulation, I don't have to wonder much about what it would mean for awareness to be a delusion. Only by positing the possibility of being in a simulation (as you have done) do you open the door to doubting absolutely everything.
Here's a reversal of the question you asked that might help you see what I'm getting at:
What is impossible in an unknown and unknowable outside world?
I think that if we assume we are not in a simulation that one's awareness (yours for you and mine for me) is undeniable, but that any other apparently aware being could be a so-called philosophical zombie. I think you'll agree with this.excreationist said:What do you think of my argument that either we are aware or we are a philosophical zombie? Either we experience the sensation of qualia or we don't. Even if the qualia is wrong we would still have the sensation of awareness..... the point of this is that we can know something about our simulation... (that we are aware) (or at least I am aware, I can't prove your awareness)
What I think you might not agree with is what I've stated before, which is that if we assume we could be in a simulation, then all bets are off. Our ideas of awareness, existence, logic, etc., may be completely wrong. As I've also said before, I can't even begin to imagine what this would mean, but if everything is potentially a delusion, then even our sensation of awareness is vulnerable to doubt. I can't fathom a way in which I could feel aware but not truly be aware, but if there is some unknowable outside world, why not? Surely, my lack of imagination does not limit what could be true in an external world. Maybe logical concepts like identity, non-contradiction and the excluded middle don't hold true in the outer world. Something could be and not be at the same time. Maybe the very concept of "being" doesn't have a correlate in the outer world.
Because I axiomatically reject the possibility of being in a simulation, I don't have to wonder much about what it would mean for awareness to be a delusion. Only by positing the possibility of being in a simulation (as you have done) do you open the door to doubting absolutely everything.
See above. When we accept the premise that all could be doubted, then all (from soup to nuts) can be doubted.excreationist said:Maybe it is flawed but so would other existence of God arguments be yet the other arguments still exist. I still think there would be a creator of the simulation - "a person or thing that brings something into existence". Or do you think a simulation can bring itself into existence? Though then it could be said that the simulation is its own creator....
Here's a reversal of the question you asked that might help you see what I'm getting at:
What is impossible in an unknown and unknowable outside world?