cameron/colby

Nick BostromYes, I did in fact almost get through a whole entry on David Deutsch without saying anything like 'quantum mechanical multiverse'.  Instead, I'm going to leave you to ponder something entirely different.

Deutsch's Law: Every problem that is interesting is also soluble.

• Corollary #1: Inherently insoluble problems are inherently boring.
• Corollary #2: In the long run, the distinction between what is interesting and what is boring is not a matter of subjective taste but an objective fact.
• Corollary #3: The problem of why every problem that is interesting is also soluble, is soluble.

I think this law is perhaps most profound with regards to its religious implications. Is theism soluble?  Should agnostics be apathetic?  Questions for another day.

For now, check out your spiritual type and religious beliefs.

If that hasn't managed to mess up your day, let's go ahead and talk about computer simulation of life. Not only is this problem theoretically soluble and interesting, but it's more related to spirituality than one might think.  I am not talking matrix fiction here, I am talking the genuine philosophical theory of Oxford Professor Nick Bostrom.  (paper, synopsis)

The simulation argument does not purport to demonstrate that you are in a simulation (nor does they author feel it is most likely that we are, he prefers #2).  Instead, it shows that we should accept as true at least one of the following three propositions:

1. The chances that a species at our current level of development can avoid going extinct before becoming technologically mature is negligibly small.
2. Almost no technologically mature civilisations are interested in running computer simulations of minds like ours.
3. You are almost certainly in a simulation.

Apologists may want to listen up here. If you can manage to take this argument a bit more metaphorically than literally, it has the makings of something a lot more accessible than Anselm's Ontological treatises.

Didn't get what I mean?  I'm not positive I do either.

Yes, Jim, this is why I'm late to your and Emily's party tonight.  I'm a loser.