Simulation Argument Philosophy Report
• First, watch the video/podcast/reading from that week on the schedule document (under
Day 1: To Consume).
• Watch: https://philosophybites.com/2011/08/nick-bostrom-on-the-simulationargument.html
• Your post should be a MINIMUM 250 words. Summarize the video/podcast/reading in
1-2 sentences. Respond to it in 3-4 sentences. You can say what you liked, disliked,
agreed with, disagreed with, add an example, give an objection, raise a question, or
discuss how the video interacts with other things we’ve discussed in class. The most
important thing is that you add something substantial rather than merely summarizing
things. Also consider writing things that your classmates may find interesting, things they
may want to reply to, or raise questions for them to think more about.
Replying to other message board posts:
• You must respond to 2 other students’ messgae board posts each week.
• Your responses should each be a MINIMUM 100 words. React to the other person’s
response. Do you agree? If so, note this and add something to their claims—an example,
a new argument or reason in support of the view, or how the view might respond to an
objection. Do you disagree? Kindly and respectfully explain why you disagree.
Disagreement in a discussion of a friendly discussion is strongly encouraged.
However, please do not attack anyone personally—keep the focus on the ideas.
1) In the podcast for this week, we learned about Nick Bostrom’s idea of the simulation
argument. He mentions three theories that go along with the simulation argument. The first one
being that almost all civilizations will go extinct before being able to use technology mature
wnough to create ancestoral simulations. The second theory being that even if any covilization
did have the ability to use the technology for creating simulation, they woulding actually be
inclined to create them. Lastly, the theird theory he mentions is the idea that we are all simply in
a computer simulation. I think this argument Bostrom presents is a really interesting thing to
think about. How do we know if we’re living in a possible simulation, since it would feel so
real? would peoples actions be any different if they find out they were living in a simulation?
Would their behaviour change? Obviously it’s hard to even believe that we could possibly be
living in a simulation, but the idea of it being true is still out there which is interesting.
2)This week we learned about the simulation argument from a podcast where Nick Bostrom
explains the three theories within the simulation argument. The first theory is that civilizations go
extinct before being able to create and use the technology that would be needed for ancestral
simulation. The second theory is that even if a civilization had the advanced technology to create
an ancestral simulation, they wouldn’t be inclined to do so. The third and final theory within the
simulation argument is that we are in a computer simulation.
This argument is quite interesting, although I’m not sure I can say that if we were in a simulation
and this was confirmed that I would change much about how I live my life. What is it about
living in a simulation that gives people the idea that they won’t care about their lives anymore?
From what we would be aware of, life would remain the same and we would still have goals,
aspirations and responsibilities. As far as I’m concerned, if you would quit your miserable job if
you knew we were in a simulation, you should just quit now. I believe we give our own meaning
to our lives, therefore if we were living in a simulation, I would still be giving myself means to