Abstract
In 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.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 45-62 |
Journal | Science and Christian Belief |
Volume | 32 |
Issue number | 1 |
Early online date | 13 Apr 2020 |
Publication status | Published - Apr 2020 |
Keywords
- Simulation hypothesis
- Limits of computation
- Information
- Occam's razor
- Substrate independence
- Soul
- Spirit
- Consciousness