This from a review in TLS: I'll provide comments upcoming
544pp. Allen Lane. £25.
In Reality+ [Chalmers] turns from mind to matter, asking how we know what’s real. In 1641, René Descartes imagined himself deceived by an evil demon, the whole course of his experience a fraud. And then he tried to prove it wasn’t so. Chalmers gives Descartes’s predicament a technological spin. According to the “simulation hypothesis”, we are the inhabitants of an immersive, interactive, computer-generated space – a virtual or simulated world, not unlike the one depicted in The Matrix (1999). Chalmers makes three radical claims about such worlds. First: it’s impossible for us to know that we’re not in one; we could be living in a simulation now. Second: this wouldn’t stop the objects we encounter from being real. Even if our world is simulated, that simulation may contain real rocks, real trees and real people. Third: life in a simulation may be just as meaningful as life in a non-virtual world.
[Review by Kieran Setiya teaches philosophy at MIT; his new book, Life Is Hard, comes out in October]
RR

2 Comments:
Well then if these three radical claims are true, then it makes no "real" difference whether we live in a simulation or not. No?
By
Dominick, at Thursday, January 20, 2022
Sooooo..IF it's true, what is the other side of this simulated world we live in?
Life after death, in the real world!?:).........?
By
Daniel, at Thursday, January 20, 2022
Post a Comment
<< Home