Explores synthetic immortality and its implications for governance in simulated minds, investigating retention policies.
Simulated Minds Series, Paper II of IV. This paper defends a conditional claim: if we inhabit a high-fidelity simulation and consciousness is substrate-neutral, then subjectively continuous survival beyond biological death, which I term synthetic immortality, cannot be ruled out. I do not argue that it is probable; the practical force rests instead on a dual track, since the sameanalysis applies, without any simulation assumption, to the digital-mind systems human institutions are already building. I introduce the Retention Question (conditional on simulation, are minds retained beyond their terminal events, and under what policy?), the SCALR-ψ model (a factorization of the credence in simulator-mediated retention, weighted by a scalar measure of psychological continuity), and a functional taxonomy of the Five Offices of a retention-capable simulation (Architect, Operator, Moderator, Archivist, Custodian). Present governance obligations arise independently of the simulation hypothesis, while credence in simulation-level retention supplies an additional, conditional reason for attention. In any engineered world, death is a feature: a design choice demanding justification. Companion papers (same series): “Evolution Is Too Slow” (Paper I), “The Immortality Question” (Paper III), “Evolution Is Engineered” (Paper IV).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stuart Van der Veen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: