# The Simulation Problem (Ethics and computer simulations) **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 8, 2013, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549 "2013-01-08T22:29:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/61 "2013-01-11T03:48:20Z")
If the simulations discussed here do not realize they are nothing but simulations, then someone has done something horrible by creating them that way in the first place, and they have to be deactivated to save humanity. If they do realize they are simulations, they won’t mind being turned off, they won’t have the egos of human beings. ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/62 "2013-01-11T05:33:48Z")
> [@Enkel](#): > > . If I were an atheist, I would be upset at this statement for many different reasons. > > As far as I’ve ever understood, most homo sapiens are biological creatures (e.g. carbon based life forms). _checks belly button_ nope, no power supply adapter there? Is your whole thinking based on if God didn’t create it; it can’t be alive? ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/63 "2013-01-11T07:24:31Z")
> [@Enkel](#): > > I haven’t rejected that they can reach a state of sentience… I’ve stated that even if they do, they are still no better than a roomba or my F250. They are objects, not biological creatures. No, you haven’t, because you claimed you’d have to be stupid to think that an artificial life form was a human being. You’ve also equated them to pets. you talk about current AI that are not even smarter than a bug. So you are clearly rejecting that they can reach human level intelligence, so you are rejecting sentience. All your arguments depend on the AI not being a person. They hypothetical as given requires it. The thing is, none of us knows that we are not a simulation. We’re actually doing studies on the subject. So, according to you, if we find out we’re a simulation, it would be ethical to kill you. And I’m not an atheist either. God is in fact running what could be seen as a simulation. He created a natural universe with rules that he can manipulate. Fortunately for us, he does have an attachment to his creation, even if he is mostly hands off. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/64 "2013-01-11T07:37:27Z")
I mean, you even seem to think that an artificial life form would have to have a plug somewhere–in other words, be a robot. When the simulation as described would inherently be indistinguishable from real life. That’s the entire premise. It’s a whole universe, not some robot. And, no, **TriPolar** , it wouldn’t know that it was a simulation, since that would defeat the point of it being a simulation. Now, maybe it can figure it out, but it could never have that information directly, or it would be useless as a simulation. And I don’t know where you guys are getting this idea that the simulation would be dangerous to anyone outside the simulation. I think you’ve seen too many movies. There’s no reason to assume we can break the simulation, and, even then, there’s no reason to assume those in charge would leave us in any position to be able damage if we did. In modern terms, would you think we’d let the simulation computer be connected to the Internet? That would be crazy! ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/65 "2013-01-11T07:51:45Z")
… ---
**Author:** ![Atomic\_Alex](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atomic_alex/32/175_2.png) [@Atomic\_Alex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atomic_Alex)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/66 "2013-01-11T11:24:30Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I mean, you even seem to think that an artificial life form would have to have a plug somewhere–in other words, be a robot. When the simulation as described would inherently be indistinguishable from real life. That’s the entire premise. It’s a whole universe, not some robot. > > And, no, **TriPolar** , it wouldn’t know that it was a simulation, since that would defeat the point of it being a simulation. Now, maybe it can figure it out, but it could never have that information directly, or it would be useless as a simulation. Exactly, the idea is that simulations have always been created to test out ‘real world’ problems but technology has advanced so far that the simulations are so complex that the people being simulated are to all intents and purposes as intelligent and self-aware as those running the simulation. You _(generic you)_ might think that could never happen but thats not really the question, the premise is that it _can_ happen and therefore what responsibilities do we have towards the inhabitants of the simulation? Personally I certainly wouldn’t be comfortable just turning the simulation off or randomly throwing in a few volcanoes in their cities to make things interesting. In addition should the ‘real world’ creators _tell_ the inhabitants that they’re only in a simulation _(as hi-fidelity and real life as it seems to them)_ or just keep it running indefinitely with occassional hands-on intervention or not _(assume that for such an advanced civilisation the power requirements to do so are neglible)_, or should it cause us no concerns just to pull the plug when the point of the simulation has been reached and we have no more use for it? ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/67 "2013-01-11T12:11:22Z")
The OP touches on philosophical questions that some may not be aware of. For example, most people assume that the brain is a kind of computer but actually there is considerable debate in the philosophical, AI and neuroscience communities on this point. Clearly the brain is a kind of _machine_, but that’s not the same thing as a _computer_, and we do not know whether a computer simulating a brain doing its thing is the same thing as a brain doing its thing. To answer the OP, I would say absolutely: _if_ the inhabitants of a simulation are conscious – they perceive colours, feel pain etc then shutting down the simulation is a form of genocide and as wrong as snuffing out human life. Note that we cannot rule out that we ourselves are in such a simulation. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/68 "2013-01-11T16:22:22Z")
> [@Enkel](#): > > They are objects, not biological creatures. Biological creatures are objects also. What makes a biological creature special in your mind? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/69 "2013-01-11T16:33:11Z")
If these simulations do not know they are simulations, they aren’t really all that sentient, they would still be puppets on a string. For these simulations to exist, someone has done the equivalent of raising a child to believe it is a simulation. Now you can say that is someone else’s fault, and the question now is about the morality of shutting off a simulation once it’s created, whether or not that was done morally. I still say it’s just a machine, because I know that, and I have no qualms about shutting it down. It is no more real in terms of equivalency to humaity than a character in a book. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549/70 "2013-01-11T17:07:04Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > If these simulations do not know they are simulations, they aren’t really all that sentient, they would still be puppets on a string. That depends on the quality of the overall simulation versus the complexity of the minds in the simulation. As I said, we can’t rule out that we are in a simulation. But I’m sure I’m sentient. I think. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-simulation-problem-ethics-and-computer-simulations/646549.md?page=3)