From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Tue Jun 18 2002 - 12:32:52 MDT
Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
> A mathematical formula does not contain real people. A book does not
> contain real people. A map does not contain real towns with real
> people. A photograph does not contain real people. Merely describing
> people with words, math or pictures does not mean they are consciously
> living outside of any physical reality.
>
> This argument is just word play. It confuses the map with the territory.
But this is the whole point of the universe as simulation hypothesis. If
our universe is a simulation, then we are nothing but mathematical
formulae processing data. Furthermore, if our minds are uploadable, they
are similarly ONLY mathematical formulae processing data. If there is
anything more to us as sentient beings, then we are not uploadable and
we dont' live in a simulation.
Furthermore, the statement "the map is not the territory" is obsolete in
the world of virtuality, because if worlds are simulated and occupiable
by uploaded or AI beings, they are both map AND territory
simultaneously.
I agree that a book, by itself, doesn't contain real people any more
than an upload mind printed out on paper would constitute a 'real'
person. When I read a book, it acts as a script by which my own core
processes can construct a living concious character. My eyes scan the
text and my mind compiles it into executable code.
Now, I agree also that any character from a book may not be as complex a
personality as I am, based purely on the text of the book and depending
on the abilities of the author as well. I may fill in the gaps or not
depending on how deeply I wish to immerse myself in the fictional world
of the characters, but I've also met quite a few rather one dimensional
people in this world as well who would make rather poor characters in a
book.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:53 MST