3 ms·
Your position is dangerously close to solipsism. You allude to Occam's razor but it also answers your question. If the simplest algorithm does not imply limitin
by alexandros 18y ago
Your position is dangerously close to solipsism. You allude to Occam's razor but it also answers your question. If the simplest algorithm does not imply limiting the amount of 'stuff' (universes), why would it limit the amount of observers?
- jackchristopher 18y agoIn principle I can't prove which I'm in. You're right. I left that out. But I see no reason to believe one over the other. But perpetual doubt is disempowering too. And when I face an undecidable with equally plausible answers, I'm forced to test each view to see the results: what's life like with view x vs. view y. That result becomes the metric for a view's worth. And honestly that could be solipsism. Although I know it as a similar concept some call "subjective reality". Again I don't believe in solipsism or SR, I'm just pointing out that either could be true and you could never know. I do believe in the multiverse though. I always thought computers as conscious would prove consciousness was physical. I didn't realize my mistake till recently.