knb comments on We are not living in a simulation - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (211)
If a simulation allowed life to evolve within it, and was not just an attempt to replicate something which already exists, would you expect natural selection within the simulation to produce beings with qualia that "match" the functional purpose?
If so, it seems like that would leave much of the simulation argument in tact.
Yes, dfranke's argument seems to map to "we are not living in a simulation because we are not zombies and people living in a simulation are zombies".
s/are not zombies/have qualia/ and you'll get a little more accurate. A zombie, supposing such a thing is possible (which I doubt for all the reasons given in http://lesswrong.com/lw/p7/zombies_zombies ), is still a real, physical object. The objects of a simulation don't even rise to zombie status.
It's really unclear what you mean by 'zombie', 'real, physical object', and 'objects of a simulation'. But you're right that Kevin meant by 'zombie' exactly 'us without qualia'. I thought this was obvious in context.
What is a physical object?
If you are not arguing for zombies, I am really confused about what you're trying to argue for.