Bostrom is convincing if you treat his postulates as axiomatic, the same way he does. I don't. Do you think rereading an unfalsifiable argument will make it les

Bostrom is convincing if you treat his postulates as axiomatic, the same way he does. I don't. Do you think rereading an unfalsifiable argument will make it less unfalsifiable? Or that a naked appeal to authority counts for anything at all, except in the realm of religious faith?