I reply to some recent comments by Brian Weatherson on my ‘simulation argument’. I clarify some interpretational matters, and address issues relating to epistemological externalism, the difference from traditional brain-in-a-vat arguments, and a challenge based on ‘grue’-like predicates.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nick Bostrom (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: