Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorMitchell, John B. O.
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-13T14:30:01Z
dc.date.available2020-04-13T14:30:01Z
dc.date.issued2020-04
dc.identifier.citationMitchell , J B O 2020 , ' We are probably not Sims ' , Science and Christian Belief , vol. 32 , no. 1 , pp. 45-62 . < https://www.scienceandchristianbelief.org/view_abstract.php?ID=1470 >en
dc.identifier.issn0954-4194
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 260558863
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 34713a26-2cc4-49ac-aa8c-61cb6dad26ba
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-0379-6097/work/72360187
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/19794
dc.description.abstractIn this article, I discuss the current state of the debate around the simulation hypothesis, the idea that the world we inhabit is a computer simulation in or within another universe. Considering recent work from a range of authors, I suggest that statistical arguments in favour of a simulated world are naive and fail to account either for Ockham’s Razor or for alternative existential possibilities besides base reality and a simulation. Most significantly, I observe that it would be computationally impossible in our own universe to simulate a similar cosmos at fine granularity. This implies substantial differences in size and information content between simulating and simulated universes. I argue that this makes serious analysis of the simulation argument extremely difficult. I suggest that Christian theology has no reason to reinvent itself to accommodate simulism; the two should be viewed as mutually exclusive world-views. Further, I note that the existence of a human soul or spirit, or indeed any non-reductionist explanation of human consciousness, could undermine the assumption of substrate independence that simulism requires.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofScience and Christian Beliefen
dc.rightsCopyright © 2020 The Author. This work has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies or with permission. Permission for further reuse of this content should be sought from the publisher or the rights holder. This is the author created accepted manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://www.scienceandchristianbelief.org/view_abstract.php?ID=1470en
dc.rightsCopyright © 2020 The Author. This work has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies or with permission. Permission for further reuse of this content should be sought from the publisher or the rights holder. This is the author created accepted manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://www.scienceandchristianbelief.org/view_abstract.php?ID=1470en
dc.subjectSimulation hypothesisen
dc.subjectLimits of computationen
dc.subjectInformationen
dc.subjectOccam's razoren
dc.subjectSubstrate independenceen
dc.subjectSoulen
dc.subjectSpiriten
dc.subjectConsciousnessen
dc.subjectQA76 Computer softwareen
dc.subjectQD Chemistryen
dc.subjectT-NDASen
dc.subject.lccQA76en
dc.subject.lccQDen
dc.titleWe are probably not Simsen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPreprinten
dc.description.versionPostprinten
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. EaSTCHEMen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Biomedical Sciences Research Complexen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Chemistryen
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.date.embargoedUntil2021-04-13
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.scienceandchristianbelief.org/view_abstract.php?ID=1470en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record