Bostrom's trilemma
Bostrom's trilemma points less to simulations themselves than to a missing hierarchy of higher-level civilizations above ours.
- Filed under
- Tech
- Type
- Background entry
- Sources
- 9
Image: wired.com
Summary
Bostrom’s argument is best read as a conditional probabilistic dilemma, not as direct evidence that we are simulated. If conscious ancestor-simulations become feasible and are produced in enormous numbers, simulated observers could vastly outnumber biological originals; under an indifference principle, a randomly selected observer would then probably be simulated. The argument leaves open which premise fails.
- At least one of three propositions is very likely: civilizational extinction before posthumanity, near-total reluctance to run ancestor-simulations, or near-certainty that we are simulated.
- If mature civilizations run vast numbers of conscious ancestor-simulations, simulated observers could greatly outnumber non-simulated observers.
- The argument does not determine which trilemma disjunct holds; it says the three cannot all be unlikely.
Deeper Insight
The strongest dissent attacks the bridge from hypothetical simulation capacity to our own simulated status. Tokayer argues that Bostrom’s reference class mixes originating civilizations with their descendants’ simulations, then reverses the direction of explanation: from what beings like us might create to what created us. Other critiques target physical limits, the hierarchy between simulators and simulated beings, and the assumptions behind observer counting.
- A central critique says the trilemma concerns lower-level civilizations creating simulations, but does not establish that any civilization exists above our level to simulate us.
- Tokayer characterizes the disputed move as inferring “we are simulated” from “beings like us can create simulations.”
- The reference class may obscure the distinction between originating observers and simulated descendants, weakening the probability inference.
Sources · 9
Featured · Analysis · philarchive.org
The Simulation Argument is a Non-Sequitur
The Simulation Argument is a Non-Sequitur Mordechai Tokayer Abstract Bostrom’s simulation argument presents a trilemma: either civilizations almost never reach technological maturity, or they almost never run ancestor-simulations, or we are almost certainly living in a simulation. This paper demonst
Read sourceAnalysis · philpapers.org
Bostrom's Simulation Argument is a Non-Sequitur
# Bostrom's Simulation Argument is a Non-Sequitur PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation). 0 citations. ## Authors - Mordechai Tokayer: h-index 0; 0 citations; corresponding author ## Topics - Space Science and Extraterrestrial Life - Philosophy and History of Science - Humanities and Social Sciences ---
Read sourceAnalysis · simulation-hypothesis.com
Bostrom’s trilemma
Thinkers 13/14 # Bostrom’s trilemma Nick Bostrom, “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?”, Philosophical Quarterly · 2003 Not an argument that we’re simulated, but an argument that one of three propositions must hold. Picture a civilisation that gets advanced enough to run detailed simulations of
Read source