Philosophical Quarterly 53 (211):243–255 (2003)
AbstractThis paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. It follows that the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor-simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation. A number of other consequences of this result are also discussed.
Similar books and articles
Computer simulation and the philosophy of science.Eric Winsberg - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (5):835-845.
Computer simulation: The cooperation between experimenting and modeling.Johannes Lenhard - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (2):176-194.
Is computer simulation changing the face of experimentation?Ronald N. Giere - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 143 (1):59 - 62.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
The nomological argument for the existence of God.Tyler Hildebrand & Thomas Metcalf - 2022 - Noûs 56 (2):443-472.
A Defense of the Rights of Artificial Intelligences.Eric Schwitzgebel & Mara Garza - 2015 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 39 (1):98-119.
The Puzzle of Metacoherence.Michael Huemer - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82 (1):1-21.
The Superintelligent Will: Motivation and Instrumental Rationality in Advanced Artificial Agents. [REVIEW]Nick Bostrom - 2012 - Minds and Machines 22 (2):71-85.
References found in this work
The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, UN++, and Quantum Joe.Nick Bostrom - 2001 - Synthese 127 (3):359-387.
The physics of information processing superobjects: daily life among the Jupiter brains.Anders Sandberg - 1999 - Journal of Evolution and Technology 5 (1).