We can’t take reality for granted.
Most interesting things we see are simulations. For example, I see Mars. Most likely I see it on TV, or in dream, or in a book. So in most cases we need to invest to prove that the object is real, not that it is simulated.
Most time we see images or dreams, not real things.
So even in our world most experience are simulations.
If I say you that I have a palace with 100 rooms, most likely I lie.
So being skeptical means not believe in reality of anything, especially large and expensive.
Of course, it would be premature to start to believe that we are in the simulation without any practical evidence. But we should give simulation hypothesis higher a priory probability.
Hmm.… I’d say that simulations and representations aren’t the same thing. A representation only presents the appearance of something in some way, whereas a simulation tries to present the appearance of something for the same types of causal reasons the real thing has. So no, I wouldn’t say that a video of mars is a simulation of mars.
I mean “Martian” movie. It is simulation of Mars, not actual video. Anyway my point is more like analogy, than straightforward argument.
The key idea is that we should be sceptical to both possibilities: that we are real and that we are in simulation.
We can’t take reality for granted. Most interesting things we see are simulations. For example, I see Mars. Most likely I see it on TV, or in dream, or in a book. So in most cases we need to invest to prove that the object is real, not that it is simulated. Most time we see images or dreams, not real things. So even in our world most experience are simulations. If I say you that I have a palace with 100 rooms, most likely I lie. So being skeptical means not believe in reality of anything, especially large and expensive.
Of course, it would be premature to start to believe that we are in the simulation without any practical evidence. But we should give simulation hypothesis higher a priory probability.
Hmm.… I’d say that simulations and representations aren’t the same thing. A representation only presents the appearance of something in some way, whereas a simulation tries to present the appearance of something for the same types of causal reasons the real thing has. So no, I wouldn’t say that a video of mars is a simulation of mars.
I mean “Martian” movie. It is simulation of Mars, not actual video. Anyway my point is more like analogy, than straightforward argument. The key idea is that we should be sceptical to both possibilities: that we are real and that we are in simulation.
You are confusing simulations and symbols.