> I hold that virtual reality is genuine reality. Ok, but one cannot do science in virtual reality. Is that not a necessity of "genuine" reality? (Certainly s

> I hold that virtual reality is genuine reality. Ok, but one cannot do science in virtual reality. Is that not a necessity of "genuine" reality? (Certainly some science can be done entirely in a virtual world, but I would say definitionally not all of science.) It's clear that what he seems to be saying is "there is no reason VR won't be an acceptable place to live". Which is fair enough, but that seems like a much weaker claim than that VR could be on par with "genuine reality" as a blanket statement.