The Simulation Hypothesis

Posted on by

https://youtu.be/VqULEE7eY8M

This video outlines and explores the philosophical and scientific history of the idealism vs materialism, and shows how the scientific evidence much better fits idealism – meaning, that everything we experience as physical reality is the result of the processing of information via a nonphysical mind (outside of space-time). I think the big problem with this perspective is that it not only challenges various forms of materialism; it also challenges many religious perspectives – at least in terms of what the fundamental nature of our existence is.

IMO, one of the interesting implications (not expressed in the video) is that if what we actually experience is indeed generated by mental processing, feedback loops could be a normal, even essential aspect of our experience. IOW, if you believe in and process information from a particular ideological/personal perspective (we all do), it may be that the experiential reality you encounter is actually being physically (not just psychologically) sustained and supported as a result of having those views and beliefs.

One wonders what the limitations would be if our “reality” experience is determined by mental processing of information (both conscious and subconscious).

6 thoughts on “The Simulation Hypothesis”

  1. I’m the first to comment?

    I say that it is nonsense. Yes, the presentation is well done. But it is still nonsense.

    The video presents an argument between materialism (whatever that means) and simulationism (ok, I just made up that word). But surely that’s a false dichotomy. The world is neither material (whatever that means), nor a simulation.

  2. if you believe in and process information from a particular ideological/personal perspective (we all do), it may be that the experiential reality you encounter is actually being physically (not just psychologically) sustained and supported as a result of having those views and beliefs.

    There’s probably a version of that claim that’s true. At least it’s true that the ways in which one engages the world will strongly constrain the kinds of patterns that show up to you as salient.

  3. Our reality is real. god created us to see reality.
    its all a error of not understanding we/soul are just WATCHING our memory screen.
    yes the memory loop[s back and helps and hinders. Being drunk proves this.
    Yet its still a simple equation of the REAL us just working with a mechanical/material organ in our head called the memory.
    So our soul does not see reality but a excellent recording of it.
    So we do deal with reality.

  4. I watched the video just long enough to hear the phrase ‘outside space and time’. That’s pretty much the exact moment I decided it wasn’t worth 50 mins of my life.

    Just for once, I think Bob Byers may make more sense.

  5. Neil Rickert:
    I’m the first to comment?

    I say that it is nonsense.Yes, the presentation is well done.But it is still nonsense.

    The video presents an argument between materialism (whatever that means) and simulationism (ok, I just made up that word).But surely that’s a false dichotomy.The world is neither material (whatever that means), nor a simulation.

    Neil is a master of criticizing OP/Comments as nonsense but never providing the justifications for his claims…
    I don’t agree with the OP that claims that our reality is a simulation/projection of whatever just because science has a hard time explaining quantum mechanics, such as entanglement, double slit ex with backwards causation…
    Dragging God into it is even worst…

    Quoting Einstein’s frustrations about his own theories doesn’t prove the point…
    All I know is that we know little or none about the nature of time…if it really exists…especially on subatomic level…

Leave a Reply