Simulations do not have the properties of the things that they simulate, so, if we're in a simulation, then we are radically deluded about how the world actually is. Simulation arguments moot premises about the supposed actual world, but as we cannot hold the premises to be true, we must reject such arguments as unsound.Kataclysmal wrote:Thanks.
The interesting question is, given that simulation arguments fail, which of their premises are refuted by reductio? In the case of Bostrom's argument, the obvious candidate is computational theory of mind. After all, as it's just the latest in a history of silly metaphors that some people have, bizarrely, taken seriously, it has never been plausible.