Their arguments, no matter how clever, would be absurd when looking in from the outside.
If there's a high probability that the simulation hypothesis is true, it seems clinically insane to believe that it doesn't matter.
Their arguments, no matter how clever, would be absurd when looking in from the outside.
If there's a high probability that the simulation hypothesis is true, it seems clinically insane to believe that it doesn't matter.
Which view point is better -- one that believes in a flat earth or one that sees the world as spherical and all that this fact entails?
A flat Earther can't put a rover on Mars but someone who knows that the world is round can.
Imagine what a person who comes to understand that the world is a simulation could do.
I we were in a simulation where the creator(s) were hands off, just letting it run its course, then I don't think it really matters. If, on the other hand, they're pulling strings and manipulating outcomes for whatever reason, then it seems like it matters a lot more. At least that's my intuition.