= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
brazil84 comments on Does the simulation argument even need simulations? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (102)
I would guess you are probably correct that Egan's argument hinges on this point. In essence, Egan seems to be making an informal claim about the relatively likelihood of an orderly dust universe versus a chaotic one.
Boiled down to its essentials, VincentYu's argument seems to be that if Egan's informal claim is incorrect, then Egan's argument fails. Well duh.